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.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On July 2014, 2014, the Plaintiff is the Defendant and the Defendant’s birth C (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”).

A) The Defendant, etc.: (a) arranged the Plaintiff to transport cargo; (b) the Plaintiff transported the cargo out of the shipment; (c) the Defendant, etc. received deposit from the Plaintiff’s account in the name of the Plaintiff; and (d) entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to acquire 7% of the transport cost as commission; and (c) pay the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting various expenses from the remainder transport cost. (d) Accordingly, the Plaintiff purchased the 14 tons of Habman Treatment 14 tons of Habman and Habman Truck and transported the cargo of Habman Logistics Company from August 1, 2014 to November 11, 2014. However, even if the Defendant received the transport charge from the Hax Logistics Company until November 2014, the Defendant did not pay the transport charge on August 9 and November 2014.

3) Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 13,056,270 calculated by deducting KRW 982,730 equivalent to the commission that the Defendant acquired in accordance with the above contract from KRW 14,039,00 for October and November, 2014, from KRW 14,039,00 for the transport charges of KRW 14,730 for the Defendant’s acquisition.

The following circumstances are revealed by the purport of each statement and the entire argument in Eul evidence Nos. 4 through 5, i.e., ① the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the remainder after deducting 7% commission and various expenses from the cargo transport price deposited in passbook opened in the name of the Plaintiff. However, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant acquired 7% of the cargo transport price under the name of the commission, ② the Plaintiff’s payment of the fee to be paid by the Defendant under the cargo transport contract of this case is from the cargo transport price in the Cheongju District Prosecutors’ Office in 2014.