1. The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 70 million and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from March 16, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B registered a business with the trade name of “D”, and operated a man-made construction business with Defendant C, the husband of the case.

B. On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff concluded the instant construction contract with the Defendants (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

-the name of the construction project: Yellow Korean-style houses (30 square meters) located in Jeju-do - The construction amount: KRW 165 million (the contract amount of KRW 70 million, the intermediate payment of KRW 70 million, and the payment of the intermediate payment at the project rate): The construction period: from July 5, 2016 to December 20, 2016;

C. On July 5, 2016, the Plaintiff paid a down payment of KRW 70 million to Defendant C, but the Defendants failed to perform construction works, and the Plaintiff revoked the instant construction contract on the grounds thereof.

[Reasons for Recognition] Defendant B: A without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings, Defendant C: by service by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. According to the facts found in the judgment as to the cause of the claim, since the instant construction contract was lawfully rescinded due to the Defendants’ nonperformance, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff 70 million won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from March 16, 2017 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

3. Determination as to Defendant B’s assertion

A. Defendant B asserts to the effect that the Plaintiff’s claim is unjustifiable merely because Defendant C was practically operated by Defendant C, and himself was merely a lending of the business name.

B. According to Article 24 of the Commercial Act, the nominal lender cannot be exempted from liability arising from the transaction. The liability of the nominal lender is to protect a third party who trades by misunderstanding the nominal lender as a business owner. Therefore, if the other party to the transaction knew of the nominal lender or was grossly negligent, the nominal lender shall be held liable.