beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 39,995,673 as well as 5% per annum from March 21, 2016 to July 8, 2016 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Defendant B
A. Defendant B operated a restaurant with the trade name “D” located in Daegu Seogu-gu C and the second floor, and sought a return of KRW 20 million from the deposit that the Plaintiff paid to Defendant B to Defendant B for the payment of the goods, and the goods were supplied to Defendant B from October 1, 2014 to March 17, 2016, and the goods were not yet paid KRW 19,95,673, and thus, Defendant B sought a payment of the said deposit and the unpaid goods.
Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. The part of the defendant A
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant Company supplied goods to the restaurant located in the Daegu-gu C and the second floor in which the Defendant Company A operated, and thereafter, Defendant B had to continue to provide the restaurant with the trade name “D,” and thereafter, Defendant B paid KRW 20 million to B to pay the goods continuously. From October 1, 2014 to March 17, 2016, the goods were still supplied to the end of 19,995,673 won. As such, the Defendant Company is jointly and severally liable with the Defendant Company to pay KRW 195,673 in total with the said deposit amount of KRW 20 million and the unpaid goods amount of KRW 19,95,673.
B. The plaintiff's assertion that the above security deposit was paid to the defendant B, and the defendant B seeks the price for the goods unpaid to the plaintiff while running the restaurant with the trade name "D," and it cannot be claimed to the defendant A, the transferor of the defendant B, who is the defendant B.
The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, as Defendant A and Defendant B are operated by the same person, the Plaintiff jointly and severally pays the above deposit and the unpaid goods. However, as Defendant A and Defendant B have a separate legal personality, it cannot be deemed that Defendant B are jointly and severally liable to pay the above debt.
The denial of the representative director E by Defendant A is Defendant B.