1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the sale, processing, etc. of steel products, and the Defendant is a person engaged in cutting or cutting steel plates, etc. with the trade name “B.”

B. The Defendant, who ordered the Plaintiff’s employees in charge of the business to become the “B” representative director, requested the Plaintiff to supply steel products and other goods as the actual representative. The Plaintiff supplied the Defendant with goods worth KRW 17,701,926 from October 5, 2015 to December 21, 2015.

C. On January 21, 2016, the Defendant paid KRW 3,000,000 out of the price of the goods to the Plaintiff, and the price of the goods unpaid is KRW 14,701,926.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining amount of KRW 14,701,926 and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from January 10, 2017 to May 17, 2017, which is the day following the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the day of full payment.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion (1), the Defendant asserts to the purport that the Plaintiff’s claim of this case filed against the Defendant is unjustifiable, since the representative of “B” is one’s own wife C.

(2) According to the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 7, the name of the business operator and the name of the tax invoice "B" were written in Eul, which is the defendant's wife, and even in the list of individual debtor rehabilitation cases against C, it is recognized that the plaintiff's claims for the above goods are stated in the list of individual debtor rehabilitation cases against C, but such circumstance alone is separate from whether the above C bears the defendant's responsibility for the nominal name holder under the Commercial Act for the obligation to pay the remaining goods, and as acknowledged earlier, the defendant is the direct party to the above