1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff has 60,595,595 won as to the claim for the price of goods against C. The Defendant is a company operated at the same place where D, the representative director of C, is the same as C. However, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 60,595,595, and damages for delay for the purpose of evading the obligation of C. Even if not, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the above KRW 60,595,595, and damages for delay.

B. Defendants 1) C and the Defendant are separate companies with different operating entities, and there is no obligation of the Defendant to repay the Defendant’s debt instead of the Plaintiff. 2) The Defendant’s evidence Nos. 3 and 4 with the content that the Defendant would pay the Plaintiff’s debt to the Plaintiff on behalf of the Plaintiff is not the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's first argument appears to the purport of claiming a corporate father, but the evidence submitted by the plaintiff alone as to the fact that C and the defendant were actually identical to the company and they were destroyed by their corporate form is insufficient. The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit, since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

B. As to whether the Defendant had decided to repay the Plaintiff’s debt on behalf of the Plaintiff Company C, Nos. 3 and 4, which are evidence related thereto, are indicated in the name of the Defendant, but its seal is not by the Defendant’s corporate seal imprint, but by other seal used by the Defendant, rather than by the corporate seal imprint, or it is difficult to recognize the fact that the seal is affixed by the Defendant, and it is difficult to recognize that it was affixed by the other seal used by the Defendant, not by the corporate seal imprint, and it is therefore difficult to recognize the fact that