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. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, in collaboration with C and D, operated the wedding hall (hereinafter “instant wedding hall”) with the trade name “F” on the Gangnam-gu Seoul E4 and 5 level, and discontinued on December 31, 2016.

B. At the time of the closure of the instant wedding hall, C owned 50% of the foregoing wedding hall, D 40% of the price, and the Defendant owned 10% of the shares.

C. The Plaintiff supplied goods, such as molds powder, oil, and shoulder, to the instant wedding hall by the end of 2016. However, the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 17,826,00 among the goods supplied by the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Evidence Nos. 1 to 3, Evidence No. 1 to 3, Testimony of Witness C of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The following circumstances acknowledged based on the above facts and the above evidence, namely, G and H signed on each transaction statement prepared by the Plaintiff by providing goods, such as molds, etc., in the instant wedding course, and stating the unpaid amount of goods, etc., according to the witness C’s testimony at the first instance trial, the Defendant is obligated to repay the partnership’s obligations arising from the operation of the instant wedding course, as the instant wedding course was verified to be an employee of the said wedding course. As such, the Defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay C, D and the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 17,826,00, and damages for delay calculated at the annual rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from July 15, 2017 to the date of full payment.

The defendant, as a 10% share owner of the instant wedding hall, failed to obtain any profit from the operation of the instant wedding hall, and C and D exclusively take charge of the operation of the instant wedding hall, and the defendant did not participate in all the operation of the wedding hall, so there is no obligation to pay the price for the goods. However, as seen earlier, the defendant did not have any obligation to pay the price for the goods