Seoul High Court 2009Nu18006 (Law No. 15, 2010)

Supreme Court Decision 2007Du15469 ( October 25, 2009)

Whether it can be deemed an act of acting on behalf of a local government when a local government-invested borrower has entered into a cargo transport contract.

Where a branch owner of a company affiliated with the branch owner directly executes a cargo transport contract in its name, the act of the branch owner on behalf of the branch owner on behalf of the branch owner, the legal effect of the contract belongs to the branch owner, but the legal effect of the contract is not attributable to the branch owner without the intent of the branch owner on behalf of the branch owner, and the other party did not have the intent of the branch owner on behalf of the branch owner.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant constitutes Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per Disposition