1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 28,134,980 and Defendant B with respect thereto from May 31, 2016; and Defendant C with respect to the same.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who manufactures and sells phrases, etc. under the trade name of “D,” and Defendant C is a person who manufactures and sells phrases, etc. under the trade name of “E.”

B. On December 4, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied the Defendant C with goods, such as Nowon-gu, the sum of KRW 15,682,70,00 (including value-added tax) of which is equivalent to the total amount of KRW 15,682,70, and the Plaintiff supplied goods, such as Nowon-gu, and the sum of KRW 18,452,280 (including value-added tax) on December 25, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 2-3, Gap evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff supplied Defendant C, who operates E, with goods equivalent to KRW 51,074,980 in total on three occasions, and Defendant B is an actual operator who used Defendant B with Defendant B or borrowed Defendant C’s name.

B. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 51,074,980 for the goods and damages for delay.

3. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. According to the above facts, Defendant C is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of KRW 34,134,980 (i.e., KRW 15,682,700) and damages for delay, barring special circumstances.

B. Defendant C’s defense of payment of the above amount of KRW 6 million was asserted to the Plaintiff on December 4, 2015. Thus, according to Defendant C’s testimony, it can be acknowledged that Defendant C paid KRW 6 million to F who represented the Plaintiff on December 7, 2015 for the repayment of the above amount of goods. Thus, the above amount of goods payment was extinguished within the scope of KRW 6 million.

Therefore, Defendant C’s defense is reasonable.

C. In addition to the supply of goods twice, the Plaintiff asserts that the goods equivalent to the total amount of KRW 16,940,000 are also supplied as of February 19, 2016, and thus, the Plaintiff is also liable to pay the price for the goods. However, the witness F is also liable.