1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Facts of recognition;

(a) Codefendant B of the first instance trial is an individual entrepreneur who runs a construction business, etc.

B, on April 17, 2013, using the Defendant’s trade name “D” and the Defendant’s name, concluded a contract for the construction of a multi-family house E on the ground (hereinafter “instant construction”) with respect to the construction of a multi-family house on the ground (hereinafter “instant construction”) between the Plaintiff and Jinju-si (hereinafter “instant construction”) by setting the construction amount of KRW 340,000,000 and the construction period from April 17, 2013 to August 23, 2013.

B. On April 19, 2013, the Plaintiff remitted the instant construction payment of KRW 120 million to a deposit account in the name of the Defendant designated by B, but B did not start the construction.

C. Accordingly, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not commence construction works until the period agreed upon with B expires (Article 22 of the Contract for Construction Works). The Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to rescind the instant contract by serving a duplicate of the complaint in the instant case. The duplicate of the complaint in the instant case reached B on June 20, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers in case of additional number), testimony of witness B of the first instance trial, result of party examination of the plaintiff of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant allowed B to run his business using the defendant's name, and the plaintiff concluded the contract of this case with B by misunderstanding the defendant as the owner of the business, and paid the advance payment. Since the contract of this case was lawfully cancelled by the plaintiff, the defendant is jointly and severally liable for restoration due to the cancellation of the contract of this case as the name truster under Article 24 of the Commercial Act with B.

B. The defendant's assertion 1 is the defendant's business registration certificate and the seal that it is necessary to prove that B illegally remodeled and rented part of the building he newly built into a house and restored to a commercial building upon receiving a corrective order from an administrative agency.