1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance is applicable.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff, a company that sells automated machinery parts, is a company that sells automated machinery parts, and all kinds of machinery parts (hereinafter “instant goods”) in the automatic control system manufacturing chain B from before 2014 to February 14, 2015 (hereinafter “instant goods”).

(2) The Plaintiff has continuously supplied the goods that were not received from B until now are KRW 12,58,660.

3) The Defendant is a person registered as the business entity under the foregoing B. (4) The Plaintiff received the money wired by the Defendant’s name to KRW 1 million on June 3, 2014, KRW 500,000,000 on September 30, 2014, and KRW 2 million on April 2, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 (including provisional number), purport of whole pleadings

B. Determination 1) The above facts and the following circumstances are as follows: (i) in a case where a seller supplies an object to a private company which is not a certain corporation, the ownership of the object belongs to a person registered as a business entity; and (ii) according to the evidence No. 1, it can be acknowledged that each date deposited with the Defendant’s name in the Plaintiff’s account in the Plaintiff’s name is the same amount as the Plaintiff’s deposit amount, and that the unpaid amount has been deducted. In light of the fact that the Defendant paid each of the above money to the Plaintiff as the price for the supply of the goods in this case to the Plaintiff, it can be confirmed that the other party who supplied the goods in this case is the Defendant who is a business entity B.) Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid amount of KRW 12,588,660, and damages for delay from September 11, 2015 to September 1, 2015, the next day on which the original copy of the payment order was served.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and the judgment of the first instance is just.