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.

1. As to the judgment of the first instance court that was rendered on May 14, 2019 by the Defendant, the Defendant filed an appeal for subsequent completion on August 19, 2019. In full view of the records and the purport of the entire pleadings in the instant case, the first instance court proceeded with the litigation by means of service by public notice from the service of the original copy of the payment order to the Defendant, and the Defendant, upon obtaining a certified copy of the judgment of the first instance on August 13, 2019, appears to have become aware of the pronouncement of the judgment of the first instance and the fact of service by public notice of the original copy of the judgment, and thus, the instant appeal for subsequent completion filed within two weeks thereafter is lawful.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a legal entity that operates an imported alcoholic beverage wholesale business at the above address, and the Defendant is an individual entrepreneur who operates an entertainment tavern in the name of Ulsan-gu C (hereinafter “instant main shop”).

The plaintiff supplied alcoholic beverages to the defendant on credit, but the defendant does not pay KRW 4,789,00,000 out of the price.

Even if the defendant did not operate the main point of this case but only lent the name of the business operator to E, the defendant cannot be exempted from liability as the name lender.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to whether the Plaintiff and the Defendant are liable for payment as the party to the transaction of goods, the registration of the instant main points has been completed in the Defendant’s name, but the actual operation of the main points in this case is the fact that they are E. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is rejected on the premise that the Defendant is the operator of the main points in this case.

B. According to Article 24 of the Commercial Act regarding the liability of the nominal lender, a person who permits another person to run a business using his/her name or trade name shall be jointly and severally liable to pay to a third party who trades by misunderstanding that person as the nominal lender.

However, the provisions of Article 24 of the Commercial Act.