1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion and determination that the Defendant did not pay KRW 31,252,40 out of the price, despite having been supplied by the Plaintiff from March 2013 to December 31, 2015, while operating a restaurant with the trade name “C”.

It is not sufficient to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant’s payment of the ELP gas amount to the Plaintiff was KRW 31,252,400 solely on the basis of each statement of evidence Nos. 1-1 through 5, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Rather, according to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, it is only recognized that the defendant paid to the plaintiff the sum of KRW 46,171,000 from March 5, 2013 to November 2, 2015.

(B) On the other hand, the Plaintiff asserted that D’s payment of the above payment details was made by lending the Plaintiff’s passbook in the name of the Defendant while operating the above restaurant, and that the Defendant’s payment of the price of ELP gas supplied by the Plaintiff was not the details of the Defendant’s operation of the above restaurant. However, the entries of the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 alone are insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s above assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it). 2. The Plaintiff’s claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.