beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 28,582,00 for the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 11, 2015 to November 10, 2015 for the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. A. Around February 2015, Defendant Company was awarded a contract for C’s new construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) from a stock company B (hereinafter “B”) with the construction cost of KRW 3.7 billion and the construction period from February 16, 2015 to June 30, 2015.
B. From April 2015 to July 2015, Plaintiff Company supplied Lebacon 93,306,000 won at the construction site of this case.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 8 through 10 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. On April 2015, the Plaintiff Company entered into a contract with the Defendant Company to supply ready-mixed at the construction site of the instant construction site via D, which is the head of the Defendant Company and the agent of the instant construction site, and supplied an amount equivalent to KRW 93,306,00 from around that time to July 2015. As such, the Defendant Company seeking payment of the unpaid ready-mixed amount to the Defendant Company. Family Affairs D does not have the authority to enter into a contract on behalf of the Defendant Company, and rather D is a party to the construction and contract, even if it does not have the authority to enter into a contract on behalf of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company is liable as the nominal owner under Article 24 of the Commercial Act. 2) However, the Defendant Company was contracted with the instant construction from the Defendant Company, but immediately thereafter, waived the said construction at the construction site and completed it on March 3, 2015.
Since then, B appointed D as the site manager, and directly executed the construction work, B, without permission, using the name of the defendant company and entered into a supply contract with the plaintiff company.
In other words, the defendant company is not a party to the supply contract with the plaintiff company, but there is no reason to have the effect of the supply contract on the defendant company.
Plaintiff
A person who is obligated to pay the price of ready-mixed to the company is B, and also acknowledges B.