1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. From October 28, 2018 to January 5, 2019, the Plaintiff mainly aimed at processing, selling, etc. fishery products, which is the primary cause of the primary claim (claiming the contractual party’s liability), supplied the Defendant with all kinds of dissolved, such as Libys, Libys, and red joints, etc.

(hereinafter “instant supply contract”). However, the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 11,260,000 out of the price of the goods supplied to the Defendant during the said period, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the said unpaid amount and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

B. Even if a person who actually received goods from the Plaintiff as the primary cause of claim (the title holder’s claim) is not the Defendant but the Defendant’s subsidiary, the Plaintiff misleads the Defendant as the business owner and supplied the goods, and the Defendant forged the appearance that would mislead the Defendant as the business owner by allowing C to use the passbook in its name.

The plaintiff trusted the above external appearance and misleads the defendant as a business owner.

Since goods are supplied as stated in the port, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining goods price and damages for delay to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

2. Determination:

A. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the plaintiff was issued a tax invoice issued in the name of the defendant for the period of his claim, and that part of the amount of goods was remitted from the account in the defendant's name.

However, in full view of the above evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, the following circumstances, i.e., ① the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract with C in the preparatory brief dated March 24, 2020, stating to the effect that “self-reliance entered into the instant contract between C, but, as C used the Defendant’s name at the time of the transaction, the Defendant is liable for the contractual responsibility or the name lending.” (ii) The Plaintiff is the Defendant.