beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.
2...
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a person who engages in the wholesale and retail business of fishery products under the trade name of E, and Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) co-defendants of the first instance trial run a restaurant in the name of “G” from Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) until November 2018. The Defendant and Defendant C Co-Defendant C (hereinafter “C”) of the first instance trial (hereinafter “C”) are children of B.
B. From the end of November 2018, the Plaintiff supplied B with fishery products to be used for the restaurant of this case, and did not receive KRW 30,060,270 from B.
(c)
C around November 23, 2018, upon the transfer of the instant restaurant’s business from B, and thereafter, the instant restaurant was operated in the name of “G.” The name of the business operator on the registration of the instant restaurant was changed from “B” to “C” on November 28, 2018, and was changed from “C” to “C” on April 29, 2019, and the Defendant reported that he/she would withdraw from the joint business place of the instant restaurant on July 24, 2019.
(d)
The Plaintiff supplied fishery products to C operated by the restaurant of this case from December 1, 2018 to June 10, 2019, but failed to receive KRW 2,980,080 for goods.
[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 5 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence No. 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is jointly and severally liable with C to pay KRW 30,040,350,00 in total, and damages for delay, including KRW 30,060,270, and KRW 2,980,080, which are the goods unpaid by the business transferor and the goods unpaid after the business transfer, to the Plaintiff, as well as KRW 33,040,350, and even if the Defendant is not the transferee of the instant restaurant, the Plaintiff is also obligated to pay damages for delay.