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. Defendant B (the husband of the Defendant, the Defendant, and the co-defendant B (the Defendant’s son; hereinafter the “B”) of the first instance trial run the wholesale and retail business of fishery products with the trade name “D” until March 2012, before the F died.

Afterward, the Plaintiff engaged in the wholesale and retail business and brokerage business of fishery products supplied the Defendant and B with a total of KRW 549,719,000, which continued to operate the business from April 2012 to November 4, 2013, with fishery products equivalent to KRW 549,719,00, and the amount currently unpaid is KRW 30,953,000.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 15, and 17 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul witness E of the first instance court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant appears to have continuously traded fishery products with B, one of the husband, even after the death of F, and thus, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the claim for the payment of goods with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2015GaBa11931 by asserting that G, which is another business entity engaged in the wholesale and retail business of fishery products and brokerage business, had been paid the unpaid amount of fishery products against the Defendant. The above court declared that the Defendant is liable to pay the above G the amount of goods 510,820 won and damages for delay, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

Unless there are special circumstances, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with B to pay the plaintiff the above KRW 30,953,000 and damages for delay.

B. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant independently operated “D” after the death of F, and the Defendant alleged that he did not participate in the case at all, but the entries of “B” No. 2 are insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

C. Accordingly, the defendant shall jointly and severally with B to the plaintiff KRW 30,953,00 and the plaintiff shall make a final decision on the goods.