1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On November 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to supply the materials necessary for the interior building of the Dong-gu Seoul Residents' Self-Governing Center in Ulsan-si. Accordingly, the Defendant supplied the materials to the Defendant. However, the Defendant failed to pay the said materials to the Plaintiff KRW 9,718,691. As such, the unpaid goods should be paid.

B. Even if the Defendant entered into the above material supply contract with D, the Defendant approved the Plaintiff to issue the tax invoice with the Defendant as the recipient, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the price of the goods unpaid to the Plaintiff according to the liability of the nominal lender under the Commercial Act.

2. Determination

A. We examine whether to conclude a material supply contract, and the fact that a material supply contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is insufficient to recognize only the evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the Plaintiff’s allegation in this part is without merit.

B. The liability of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act for the existence of the nominal lender’s liability is jointly and severally liable to the third party who has permitted the third party to engage in the business using his name or trade name, and the third party who has transacted with the third party as the proprietor of the business. Even according to the plaintiff’s assertion, since even according to the plaintiff’s assertion, the defendant does not permit D to engage in the business using the defendant’s trade name, and therefore, the above provision on the liability of the nominal lender cannot

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit to further examine.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit.

The judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.