1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a business entity running a PVC and Mate wholesale business, etc., and the Defendant is a business entity running “D” in the manufacturing business of plastic line, sealing, pipes, and heading.

On the other hand, E is practically operating “H” in the name of wife G, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing synthetic resin, etc., and is the Defendant’s land-related birth relationship.

B. From October 29, 2014 to January 21, 2015, E supplied the Defendant with goods equivalent to KRW 45,529,250 in total, such as scrap, PVC, carpets, etc., and thereafter received all the goods from the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1 through 3 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), testimony of witness E of the first instance court, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether contractual liability is established;

A. (1) Whether the Plaintiff’s assertion is the Defendant’s agent? The Plaintiff concluded a goods supply contract with the Defendant, and supplied goods equivalent to KRW 49,365,140,00 in total to the Defendant from October 29, 2014 to January 21, 2015, but did not receive the payment from the Defendant. Therefore, the Defendant was not liable to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of the above goods amounting to KRW 49,365,140, and the damages for delay thereof. (2) The Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to believe that each statement in the evidence Nos. 5 and 6 (written confirmation) presented by the Plaintiff is consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion, and it is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion solely on the basis of the evidence Nos. 1 through 4. There is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the purport of the entire argument in the testimony of witness E of the first instance trial, the plaintiff supplied plastic raw materials to F. E purchased plastic products processed by F from F and supplied them to the defendant, and E did not make the statement to the effect that E is the defendant's representative at the time of being supplied with goods from F, and E does not make the price of the goods from the defendant.