beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of manufacturing, wholesale, and retail business of clothing, sports supplies, etc., and the Defendant is a company with the purpose of manufacturing, clothing trade and export and import business, clothing manufacturing, wholesale and retail business, etc.
B. Around January 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant and the Defendant to be supplied with reflective sportss, reflectives, and wind straws (hereinafter “instant contract”) and paid KRW 66,200,000 as advance payment to the Defendant.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence No. 1 (including each number, if any), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. The facts that the Plaintiff paid KRW 66,20,00 to the Defendant as an advance payment under the instant contract are as seen earlier. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1 through 6 and No. 1 of the evidence No. 1 of the instant contract (including each number where there are serial numbers), the Defendant did not supply all the goods agreed upon to the Plaintiff after the instant contract, and the goods already supplied were not defective and thus were returned from the Plaintiff. Accordingly, if the Plaintiff deducted the price of goods to be paid to the Defendant from the advance payment, the Defendant would finally return KRW 56,229,165 to the Plaintiff.
Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above amount and damages for delay to the plaintiff, barring special circumstances.
B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant asserts that D borrowed the Defendant’s name and concluded the instant contract with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff was well aware of such circumstances, so the Defendant is not liable under the instant contract. (2) The Defendant asserts that the liability of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act, which is determined on the grounds of the mistake of the nominal lender as the business owner, shall be protected.