1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic Facts

A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “A”) operated Smarket (C points; hereinafter referred to as “instant marina”) on the first floor of the Gyeyang-gu Incheon building B.

Around December 2013, the Defendant agreed to accept the instant marina from A, and entrusted D with the operation of the instant marina, and began to operate the instant marina from February 2014. The end of March 2014, which was before the Defendant’s business registration, had been conducted under A’s name and had been conducted under the Defendant’s name from April 1, 2014.

However, when it was difficult for the Defendant to operate the instant marina due to the cancellation of the business registration under the name of the Defendant on the instant marina, the Defendant renounced the operation of the instant marina as of July 17, 2014, and completed the instant marina in the instant marina, and D again operated the instant marina in the name of A from July 18, 2014 to August 30, 2014, the following day.

【Ground of recognition】 The defendant is still liable to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 26,198,70 for the final payment of the goods as of August 30, 2014, on the ground that the plaintiff is still an operator of the instant marina, even during the period from July 18, 2014 to August 30, 2014, as to the ground for recognition: (a) the fact that there is no dispute; (b) Gap's evidence Nos. 1 to 4, 11; and (c) Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 9, and 10 (including a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (c) the testimony of the witness D of the first instance court; and (d) the whole purport of the pleading.

(A) The Plaintiff’s assertion as above is based on the premise that the other party to the transaction of Cheongbu Products is the Defendant for the above period. However, each statement of evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 8, 10, and 12 cannot be deemed as the Defendant’s operator during the period from July 18, 2014 to August 30, 2014, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, the Defendant waived the operation of the instant marina on July 17, 2014 and accepted it in the instant marina, and D on July 18, 2014.