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. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiff engaged in the construction and manufacturing of signboards has completed the installation of signboards at “C” in accordance with the signboard installation contract concluded with the defendant around December 2012 (hereinafter “instant signboard installation contract”), but it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff was not paid KRW 7,200,000 for the installation of signboards.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above KRW 7,200,000 and damages for delay to the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.

B. On October 2012, the Defendant concluded a franchise agreement with B, a franchisor, as to the school premises of “C” around October 2012, and agreed that expenses such as signboards shall not be included in the establishment cost. However, the instant signboard installation agreement is concluded between the Plaintiff and B, and it is not a party to a contract that is not obligated to pay the installation cost of the signboard, and it appears that he would pay the interior cost more widely calculated after the franchise agreement, and that he would pay the interior cost more broadly than the actual size of the store, and concluded a re-contract by amending the terms of the agreement to include all the installation cost of the signboard, etc. on or around March 2013. Accordingly, the Defendant did not have any obligation to pay the Plaintiff the installation cost of the signboard.

The testimony of the witness D in the trial room alone is not sufficient to reverse the fact that the defendant is a party to the contract or refuse to pay the cost of installing the signboard, and the circumstance of the defendant's assertion seems to be a matter to be resolved between the defendant and the stock company, so the defendant's assertion is not acceptable.

2. Accordingly, the Defendant is entitled to KRW 7,200,000 as well as 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from June 18, 2014 to the date of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of a copy of the instant complaint.