1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 6, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Nonparty D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) with which C was the representative director, to be supplied with raw area arising from the processing of livestock products from the Nonparty Company, and paid KRW 150 million to the Nonparty Company as the security deposit. On March 2012, the Plaintiff was unable to receive a refund of part of the security deposit after having rescinded the said contract, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the return of security deposit against the Nonparty Company. In the said lawsuit, the lower court sentenced the Plaintiff to “the Nonparty Company shall pay KRW 83,59,278 to the Plaintiff and its delay damages.” The lower judgment became final and conclusive.

B. The Defendant was a juristic person established on December 18, 2012 for the purpose of distributing livestock products, and its representative director is E, who is a father of C, and in-house director is F, who is the wife of C, and auditor G was an employee of the non-party company.

C. The Plaintiff received part of the claim for the refund of deposit against the non-party company against the F, etc., and the obligation for the refund of deposit to the Plaintiff of the non-party company was 65,143,408 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. In order to avoid any defect in the enforcement of the claim for the purchase of livestock products against the above schools, etc. of the non-party company, C claiming abuse of corporate personality supplied the processed livestock products to H secondary schools, etc. The plaintiff established the defendant corporation at the same address and registered the defendant corporation as the representative director, the wife F as the director, the factory manager of the non-party company as the auditor, and operated the processing factory of livestock products in the same manner as before, and supplied them to the defendant in the name of the defendant.

As such, the defendant is identical or similar to the non-party company's trade name, business purpose, address, and trader, and the defendant's executive is a family member or employee of C who is the representative of the non-party company.