1. The appeal by the defendant (appointed party) is dismissed;

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant (appointed party).

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a business operator who manufactures the original yarn, the original network, etc. with the trade name of D, and the Defendant and the selector are living together with the couple at night.

B. On August 8, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied 15,072,00 won to the selector at night, and on September 8, 2015, lent KRW 9,984,00 to the selector.

C. On October 4, 2016, the Defendant: (a) drafted a statement of payment that the Plaintiff shall pay to the Plaintiff a total amount of KRW 25 million by December 31, 2016 (hereinafter “instant statement of payment”); and (b) agreed with the selector to pay the price for supply and the loan in accordance with the instant statement of payment.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, the Defendant and the selector are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of money that is paid to the Plaintiff and the amount that is calculated at the rate of 5% per annum under the Civil Act from January 1, 2017 to the service day of the authentic copy of the payment order in this case, and the amount that is calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment, unless there are special circumstances.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserts that, in 2015, the amount of KRW 10,00,000 out of the above price of supplied goods, the Defendant agreed to substitute for the Plaintiff’s direct receipt from the subsidized group of subsidies for the payment of the said subsidies, the Plaintiff agreed to receive the said subsidies in lieu of the Plaintiff’s direct receipt from the subsidized group. As such, the Plaintiff did not have a duty to pay the said KRW 10,000,000 on the wind that the Plaintiff did not submit a tax invoice necessary for receiving the subsidies

In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in Eul evidence No. 1, the fact that the selectr applied for the subsidy of KRW 10,000,000 for night harvest net to the head of the Gun to which he was granted is recognized.

However, this shall not apply.