beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, jointly and severally with Defendant B, KRW 94,227,00,00, respectively.
Reasons
Basic Facts
While the Plaintiff was running the wholesale and retail business with the trade name of “F,” the Plaintiff supplied Defendant B, who operated the “G” in heading 105 of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building, from December 30, 2002.
On June 22, 2011, the trade name of the same restaurant (hereinafter referred to as “instant restaurant”) was changed to E, regardless of its trade name, and the name of the business operator was changed to C.
The Plaintiff continued to deliver the fireworks to the above restaurant even after the trade name of the restaurant and the registered name of the business operator was changed as above, and received confirmation from Defendant B on the delivery and the outstanding balance.
Defendant B also prepared to repay 181,252,00 won of the outstanding amount as soon as possible until January 9, 2012.
However, following the change of name, the Plaintiff’s fireworks by credit card in the name of Defendant C was settled. From June 22, 2011 to June 19, 2014, the price for the fireworks supplied by the Plaintiff to the instant restaurant is KRW 95,47,00 in total, and the price for the fireworks paid by credit card in the name of Defendant C during the said period is KRW 106,90,000 in total.
Even after the receipt of each letter, the Plaintiff still suspended the transaction under the circumstances where the outstanding amount was 173,654,000, and sent a content-certified mail stating that the Defendants would pay the outstanding amount to the Defendants on July 18, 2014.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including the number of each branch number), and the summary of the plaintiff's assertion as to the ground of claim as to the whole of the arguments, as members of the same club, the defendants, as members of the same club, operated the restaurant directly by the defendant Eul, and the defendant C operated the restaurant of this case as a joint operation of the restaurant of this case.
In addition, Defendant C changed the trade name of a restaurant from “G” to “E”, and continued to be fireworks while maintaining the human organization, such as restaurant business facilities and employees.