1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the reasoning of the judgment is written or added as follows, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Nos. 13 and 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be construed as the "U.S. District Court Support".

The following shall be added to the fourth instance judgment of the first instance as follows: “There is no evidence to be recognized” in the 15th instance judgment.

“(In other words, as seen earlier, the Defendant’s major asset-based factory site is not succeeded from the non-party company, but appears to have been acquired by the Defendant itself, and the ratio of export amount among the sales of the non-party company is very low, while the Defendant’s sales amount accounts for a significant portion of the export amount, and the customer

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant asserts that he succeeds to the customer of the non-party company, and continues to conduct the business with the same content as the non-party company.

The closure of the non-party company constitutes abuse of legal personality since the content of the company's form is substantially identical to that of the defendant who has already been established for the purpose of evading the debt owed by the non-party company to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant cannot deny his liability on the ground that he is a separate legal entity from the non-party company, and the defendant is obliged to pay the non-party company's debts of KRW 271,145,368 and its delay damages.

B. If an existing one company establishes a new company substantially identical in the form of the existing company for the purpose of evading debts, the establishment of the new company is abused the company system in order to achieve illegal purpose, such as evading debts of the existing company. Thus, the assertion that the above two companies have a separate legal personality against the creditors of the existing company cannot be permitted in light of the principle of good faith.

That is, the existing company.