1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 51,728,701 and the interest rate of KRW 12% per annum from February 19, 2019 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. From around April 2012, the Plaintiff runs the wholesale business of selling mobile phones and communications apparatus with D’s trade name, and the Defendant opened the business registration of E, which runs the retail business of mobile phones and communications apparatus around April 2012.

B. On April 3, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a consignment contract with E in the name of the Defendant for mobile phones and telecommunications equipment (hereinafter “instant consignment contract”) and prepared a written agreement on the prevention of unfair business practices in the name of the Defendant and submitted it to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. After entering into the instant consignment contract with the Plaintiff, the Defendant: (a) sold mobile phones in an unlawful way from September 2015 to another person’s name or opened them in a false manner; or (b) did not pay cash sales proceeds to the Plaintiff; (c) thereby, the Plaintiff suffered damages from KRW 51,728,701.

The above act of the defendant constitutes a tort against the plaintiff or a default on the contract of the consignment sale of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above damages and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. The defendant's argument E actually operated is not the defendant but the defendant's child F, and the defendant did not participate in the contract on the consignment of a mobile phone.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant conspired with F in actual operation of E is without merit.

3. In full view of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (including each number, if any), the defendant established a business registration of Eul and entered into the instant consignment contract with the plaintiff around April 3, 2012, and the defendant thereafter entered into a contract on the consignment of this case with the plaintiff around April 3, 2012.