1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur engaged in the steel-frame cutting business with the trade name of “D”. The Defendant is a company that engages in the construction business of creative iron, etc., and C is an individual entrepreneur who engages in the construction business with the trade name of “E”.

B. Around June 1, 2016, the Defendant entered into a construction management contract with C to the effect that C is fully liable for all the matters of the construction project, including the material cost and wage cost in the construction site managed by C, among the construction works performed under the Defendant’s name.

C. From August 16, 2017 to November 24, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied C with steel materials, such as poppy, pipe, etc.

C paid a total of KRW 35,00,000 in the name of “E” to the Plaintiff’s account four times from September 2017 to February 2018, and paid KRW 32,859,697 on September 26, 2018, KRW 35,000,000 on September 29, 2017, and KRW 300,000 on November 5, 2017, 200,000 on KRW 17,00,000 on February 3, 2018; however, the Plaintiff agreed not to pay KRW 32,859,697 on February 14, 2018 to the effect that the remaining amount of goods unpaid between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff shall be reduced to KRW 17,00,000,000,000 on the condition that the Plaintiff shall pay the remaining amount of goods to the Plaintiff by up to 10,010.

E. Meanwhile, from May 2017 to October 2017, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice on six occasions with the Defendant supplied.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff supplied the goods of this case to the defendant, and the defendant is liable for the goods supply contract party, and even if not, the defendant permitted the defendant to conduct the business by using his name, so the defendant is liable for the name lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act. The defendant is jointly and severally liable with the co-defendant C of the first instance court for the goods reduced to the plaintiff 17,00.