beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of a comprehensive liquor wholesale business, etc., and the Defendant is a person who operates a restaurant in the trade name of “D” in Young-gu, Young-si C.
B. By April 30, 2013, the Defendant received alcoholic beverages from the Plaintiff through Plaintiff’s business director E, such as cattle, cans, beer, etc.
C. While E was working as a business employee in a number of liquor wholesale markets, around October 201, he/she entered the Plaintiff company with approximately KRW 18,000,000 on the condition that he/she transferred the Plaintiff, such as attempted bonds, ice removals, freezings, etc. to the customer instead of acquiring about 10% of the shares of the Plaintiff company.
The Plaintiff’s transaction and revenue method: (a) fixing the price with a profit of 6-7% at the ex-factory price, and (b) selling employees such as E, etc., upon receiving the order of alcoholic beverages from the customer, the Plaintiff supplied alcoholic beverages to the customer via E, etc.; and (c) sales employees such as E, etc., supplied the ordered alcoholic beverages to the customer, and immediately received the transaction price plus the business employee’s personal profit from the customer, and received the payment by a liquor card, in cash directly by the business employee, or by receiving the transfer from the account in the name of the business employee and deposited the Plaintiff’s account only by the ex-factory price.
E. However, around the end of April 2013, E retired the Plaintiff Company without depositing the amount of KRW 40 million to KRW 50 million, among alcoholic beverages paid by the Customer, without depositing it in the Plaintiff Company.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the whole or part of Eul evidence, and the purport of the testimony and whole argument of the witness E of the first instance court
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The parties’ assertion asserts that the Plaintiff did not receive an amount equivalent to KRW 877,300 from the Defendant.
In this regard, the defendant is only engaged in transactions with E and no one is the plaintiff.