1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. Around September 2015, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion supplied the pumps equivalent to KRW 28,90,000,000 in total at the construction site of C upon request from C. Since then, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 19,00,000 in total on three occasions.

Since the parties who entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for the supply of the pumps are the actual operators (or partners), the Defendant is obligated to pay the remainder of the goods to the Plaintiff (=28,900,000 won - 19,000,000 won) and damages for delay.

2. According to the evidence Nos. 2-1 through 3-3, the fact that the account in the name of the defendant was transferred from September 17, 2015 to the account in the name of the plaintiff, 7,000,000 won, 10,000 won on December 15, 2015, and 2,00,000,000 won on March 18, 2016 can be acknowledged.

However, the above facts alone are insufficient to recognize that the defendant was a party who entered into a law firm supply contract with the plaintiff or was engaged in the business with C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Rather, according to subparagraph 1-1-3 of the evidence No. 1-3 and the purport of the whole pleadings, the Plaintiff is only recognized as issuing a trading statement on September 15, 2015, September 19, 2015, September 2015, and September 20, 2015, and the other party who entered into a contract for the supply of pumps is C (see, e.g., the complaint).

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion that the defendant is a party to the law firm supply contract or is premised on the business relationship with C is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.