1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as follows, except for the Defendant’s argument in the trial, and the reasoning for the judgment in the first instance is as stated in the part of the reasoning of the judgment. Thus, it is decided to accept this as it is by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

(However, the court of first instance rejected all the plaintiff's primary claims against the defendant and the defendant, and partly accepted the conjunctive claims, and only the defendant appealed, the scope of this court's trial is limited to the part which accepted the plaintiff's claim among the conjunctive claims). 2. Additional decision

A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff would be granted the purchase price to E in the telephone conversations with E, and that E has the right to represent the conclusion of the sales contract, therefore, E has the right to receive the purchase price.

In addition, when the sales amount is paid to the used cars brokerage, the payment to E is valid since the intermediary pays the sales amount to the seller is a transaction practice of used cars.

B. The Plaintiff granted the right to receive the price under the sales contract to E on the sole basis of the circumstances constituting the premise for recognition of the apparent representation recognized in the judgment of the first instance court.

It is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant’s payment of the purchase price to E is a repayment to quasi-Possessor of a claim without negligence, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Even if there exists a trade practice, such as the Defendant’s assertion, such practice alone cannot be deemed as a performance of the obligation to pay the purchase price to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's preliminary claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is without merit.