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. On March 20, 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Seocheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the amount of KRW 87,860,00 (excluding value-added tax), and the construction period from March 20, 2013 to August 30, 2013, for earth and sand, pipes, structures, packaging, and appurtenant works (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

B. However, the Defendant allowed A to be issued a tax invoice for the user fee of equipment necessary for the instant construction in the name of the Defendant, taking into account the fact that A is not registered as a business entity and thus A cannot issue a tax invoice under A’s name.

C. Accordingly, around June 2013, A leased packaging equipment necessary for the instant construction from the Plaintiff in the name of the Defendant, and completed the packing work by July 2013 using such equipment. On August 31, 2013, A issued a tax invoice of KRW 9,311,50 (including value-added tax; hereinafter “the instant construction price”).

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap 2, 3, 4-3, Eul 1, Eul 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion (1) The plaintiff entered into a lease contract with the field agent of the defendant company through the construction of the Seocheon-gu Office and the introduction of C, and issued a tax invoice in the name of the defendant in the future. (2) Even if the defendant is not a party to the contract, as long as the defendant allowed A to work as the field director, issued a tax invoice in the name of the defendant, and allowed the defendant to use the name of the defendant company's employees, the plaintiff is liable for the payment of the construction price in this case as the nominal owner. (3) The defendant lends the name to A based on illegal subcontracting relationship