1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. (1) The Defendant registered the business with the trade name “C” on January 25, 2010, and allowed B to operate C by using business registration from the above date and time.

(2) On March 9, 201, the Plaintiff operating a heating and cooling equipment installation business, etc., was not paid KRW 5,100,000 for each construction cost, even if each of the above construction works was completed on July 2, 2011, the Plaintiff received a subcontract for installation of the heating and cooling equipment with the trade name of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D 2nd air conditioners, Incheon Jung-gu E on May 7, 201, and the installation of the first floor air conditioners on July 2, 201.

(3) On March 15, 2013, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice stating the supply value of KRW 13,400,000 as the person who is supplied with the Defendant on June 30, 2013, with the payment of KRW 13,50,000, with the payment of KRW 13,400,000 among the above construction cost, by setting the heating and cooling equipment installation work for the first floor of G building as 13,40,000 at permanent residence from the above B, and only KRW 13,50,000 among the construction cost.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 1 through 6, 9 through 14, and Eul's 4 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. (1) According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the defendant lent the name of B by allowing the defendant to operate C using the defendant's trade name, and accordingly, the plaintiff concluded each of the above subcontract agreements by misunderstanding the defendant as a subcontractor of each of the above construction works, and completed each of the above construction works. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with the plaintiff in accordance with the legal principles of the nominal lender's liability under Article 24 of the Commercial Act to pay 5,100,000 won in the balance of the above construction work price and 6,340,000 won in the non-payment of the value-added tax on the site of "H" located at the permanent residence and the delay damages.

However, the first instance court accepted the defendant's assertion and applied for value-added tax 1,240.