1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

(b) the facts of the basis;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation whose main business is a concrete manufacturing business, wholesale and retail business, etc., and the Defendant is a business operator who runs a construction business under the trade name of “C”.

B. On May 25, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared an order for ready-mixed (hereinafter “instant order”) with the main contents as set out below as between D and D, and supplied ready-mixed at the construction site designated or requested by D.

The name of the order for settlement of cash: The name of the head office and factory in charge of the Cash Settlement Co., Ltd. on the 15th day of the following month from the end of each month under the settlement terms of 25-21-150 square meters in total of the unit price added tax for 25-21-150 square meters per unit of A 62,500 6,250 6,750 25-24-150 m25-150 m26,80 6,580 m2,72,380 m25 m25,80 m25,80 m25,80 m25,80 m25,000 m25,000 m25,000 m25,000 m25,000 m2.

C. Meanwhile, upon drawing up the instant order, D issued the Defendant’s business registration certificate in the name of the business entity to be used for the transaction to the Plaintiff, and indicated “C” in the business entity’s trade column as seen above.

Therefore, in relation to the supply transaction of ready-mixed with D based on the instant order, the Plaintiff used the trade name and business name of “C” and “C” in the supply invoice and tax invoice processing.

Between May 2015 and August 2015, the Plaintiff supplied ready-mixeds to the construction site requested by D, such as the Sdong, Kimhae-si, Busan, and the construction site. Among them, on August 2015, the Plaintiff supplied 2,605,680 won in total (i.e., value of supply of value of KRW 2,368,80, value-added tax of KRW 236,880) to the construction site of the Geum-gu, Busan, U.S., and then did not receive the price on August 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3, and arguments.