1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is subject to Paragraph (1).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C independently operated the instant restaurant with the trade name “E” (hereinafter referred to as “E”) from around 1997 to February 2, 2015, the entire city area D from 1997 to 2015.

Since February 13, 2015, C entered into a partnership agreement with the Defendant and F to jointly operate the instant restaurant from February 23, 2015 to February 23, 2020, and the Defendant jointly operated the instant restaurant from February 23, 2015 to February 23, 2020.

B. From around 2012 to April 25, 2016, the Plaintiff, a company operating food wholesale and retail business, supplied foodstuffs to the instant restaurant at the request of C or the Defendant.

As of June 12, 2017, among the goods supplied by the Plaintiff to the instant restaurant as of June 12, 2017, the unpaid amount is KRW 8,687,400.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the cause of claim 1) Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act provides that "if a business transferee continues to use a transferor's trade name, a transferee shall also be liable for the third party's claim arising from the business of the transferor." Thus, in cases where a business transferee establishes a stock company and continues to use the trade name by investing in the business, the concept of the business which is the object of investment is identical, but it is similar to the transfer of business in that it is a business by juristic act, and from the standpoint of creditors, it is difficult to distinguish the external transfer from the external transfer of business. Thus, a newly established corporation is liable for the repayment of an investor's obligation by analogical application of Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da12231, Aug. 22, 1995). In light of the purport of Article 42(1) of the Commercial Act, which provides for the liability of the transferee of business who employs the trade name.