beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s basic facts remain as follows: (a) from January 4, 2016 to March 29, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied each other’s products, such as saw and saws, to each other’s business entity from April 24, 2016 to January 4, 2017; and (b) supplied the outstanding amount to KRW 10,579,738.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. 1) The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant and the co-defendant C of the first instance trial jointly operated “D” and “E”. As such, the Defendant is liable to jointly pay the foregoing outstanding amount to the Plaintiff. 2) The gist of the Defendant’s assertion: (i) the Defendant’s operation of a mutual intent company called “D” from October 19, 2015; and (ii) the trade name was changed to “F” around January 2016.
② However, “E” is the Defendant’s birth and the co-defendant C of the first instance trial independently established on or around March 2016, and the Defendant has only been engaged in the following transactions with “E”.
③ At the same time, the Defendant, while operating “F”, was in charge of C’s business, and was in charge of manufacturing the order quantity kept by business activities to C by ordering C, if the order quantity was subcontracted to C, and the Defendant was in charge of the processing cost.
④ Therefore, C is responsible for the price of goods supplied by the Plaintiff to “E”, and there is no reason for the Defendant to be responsible for it.
B. In light of the facts without dispute over recognition, and the overall purport of the pleading in Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 6, the following facts are recognized:
① On October 19, 2015, the Defendant registered as a business entity of “D” and operated the relevant business jointly with C.
② On February 6, 2016, the Defendant sent the Plaintiff a text message, which is named as “E” and “E”, to the effect that the Defendant’s name was indicated as “F” and “E.”
③ The Plaintiff also is the Defendant in text messages dialogue, etc.