1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant did not pay 25,168,000 won even though he was supplied with the 300 electricalter by the plaintiff, and the defendant did not claim that he was supplied with the 300 electricalter by the plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. Whether the Defendant is a contracting party. (1) According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, 6, and 7 (including paper numbers), the Plaintiff is a contracting party to the instant supply agreement with C upon introduction on September 30, 2013 (hereinafter “instant supply agreement”).

(2) From October 1, 2013 to supply goods, such as electricity bags, to C, and then issued a detailed list of transactions with the Defendant to whom C is supplied. At the time, C was registered as a director in the Defendant’s corporate register, and the Defendant may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff deposited KRW 7 million in the Plaintiff’s deposit account on September 30, 2013. However, the above evidence and the statement of evidence No. 1 and the entire arguments can be known by the entire intent of the oral argument, namely, the contract prepared at the time of the conclusion of the instant supply contract, are not entirely indicated with the Defendant’s trade name or title, but only indicated with C and B’s personal information and contact details, and even with the Plaintiff’s transaction account books (foreign account books). In view of the fact that C was registered with the Defendant’s director until December 12, 2014, and C merely entered into the instant contract with the Defendant and received the payment of the money from the Defendant and the Defendant, a private individual, at the time of the instant supply contract with C and the Defendant 10.