1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is subject to paragraph (2).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 14, 2016, the Plaintiff operating “D” received a subcontract for the Changho Construction Work from the “E” (hereinafter “E”) among the construction works for the steel framed in the Fulan Factory, and supplied, respectively, metal windows worth KRW 550,000,000 in the side of the Non-Party Company, around April 21, 2016, and around June 27, 2016, respectively.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the above subcontract, the Defendant introduced himself as the representative of the non-party company.

C. The co-defendant is the defendant's spouse as a representative in the business registration of the non-party company.

On October 5, 2016, Nonparty Company closed its business, and the Defendant established and operated “Co. E” on October 18, 2016.

E. Until now, the price for the goods that the Plaintiff had not received from the non-party company is KRW 1,453,00,000, and the co-defendant stated that the co-defendant was liable to pay the said amount to the Plaintiff in the Suwon District Court case of individual rehabilitation No. 2017, 1364, and the repayment plan was decided on October 29, 2018.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 1, 8 and 10 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Defendant is obligated to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff actually operated the non-party company.

B. The defendant merely borrowed the name of the non-party company as an employee of the non-party company as a practical representative, and the defendant merely borrowed the name of the non-party company. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is without merit, and it is unfair because it intends to receive double payment from the defendant and the co-

3. The following circumstances revealed by the fact of the above recognition and the evidence revealed earlier, i.e., the Defendant’s use of the name of Nonparty Company’s representative, and concluded a contract with the Plaintiff and approved funds.