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. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff has supplied imported meat to a restaurant (hereinafter “instant restaurant”) operated by the network B (hereinafter “the network”) with the trade name “D” in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, as a company that distributes and sells livestock products, food materials, etc. from October 2014.

B. On October 29, 2015, the name of the business operator of the instant restaurant was changed from the Deceased, and the Plaintiff continued to supply the imported land to the instant restaurant even thereafter.

Meanwhile, the Deceased died on January 3, 2016.

C. On November 26, 2015, the price for the goods supplied by the Plaintiff to the instant restaurant was deposited to the Plaintiff in the name of the deceased (the first Defendant was deposited in the name of the deceased and was revoked, again deposited in the name of the deceased) on November 26, 2015. The price for the goods on November 2015 was deposited to the Plaintiff in the name of the deceased on December 30, 2015.

From December 2, 2015 to December 31, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied goods equivalent to KRW 19,277,171 in total to the restaurant of this case. The price of the said goods has not been paid up to the present day.

After that, from January 8, 2016 to January 30, 2016, the price for goods supplied to the instant restaurant was paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 19,277,171 and delay damages therefrom, as the name of the instant restaurant was changed to the Defendant from October 29, 2015 to October 29, 2015, since the instant restaurant operated the instant restaurant.

Even if the Defendant did not operate the restaurant at that time, he is liable for the nominal lender’s liability under Article 24 of the Commercial Act or for the assignee’s liability under Article 42 of the Commercial Act, and thus, he is liable to pay the Plaintiff the price of the goods and the damages for delay.

B. The Defendant’s assertion on the deceased on January 2016.