beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. The reasoning of this court’s acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the second to third to fourth of the judgment of the court of first instance is just the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, (b) the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act is cited.
2. Part 2. Judgment on the defendant's argument
A. The other party who entered into a contract for the supply of the goods in this case by the defendant's assertion is not the defendant but the husband, and it is difficult to register the business in the name C due to tax delinquency, and only the name of the contract is the defendant under the plaintiff'
As such, the instant goods supply contract is null and void pursuant to Article 108(1) of the Civil Act, since the parties to the contract are falsely indicated as the defendant upon the collusion with the Plaintiff and C, and the Defendant does not bear any obligation to pay the goods under the said goods supply contract
Even if the goods supply contract of this case is valid, the plaintiff is well aware of the fact that the defendant is only the nominal lender, and thus, it cannot be claimed against the defendant for the payment of the goods.
B. Generally, who is the party to the contract is a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract.
The interpretation of a declaration of intent is to clearly determine the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of indicating, and where the contents of a contract are written in writing as a disposal document between the parties, the objective meaning that the parties have given to the act of expressing intent shall be reasonably interpreted according to the contents of the document, regardless of the internal intent of the parties, even though it is not attached to the phrase used in the document. In this case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the existence and contents of the declaration of intention shall be acknowledged as
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da92487 Decided May 13, 2010). However, the same is applicable.