1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the fifth and sixth floors (D; hereinafter “Sariland”) from among the buildings of the fifth and sixth floors and the sixth floors on the ground of land, the Plaintiff is a person registered as the owner of the instant friendship from October 4, 2004, and the Defendant is the representative of E who manufactures and installs the heat exchange machine, etc.

B. On December 8, 2010, the Defendant entered into a contract on the supply of facilities (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) with Nonparty F, who represented by the Plaintiff, to install and supply the typer heat exchange equipment at KRW 31,500,000 in price for the instant letter of credit (hereinafter “instant supply contract”).

C. Around that time, the Defendant supplied and installed the above heat exchange machine, but agreed to determine the price for supply as KRW 22,00,000 per month between F and F, stating that the price for supply is KRW 1,00,000 per month, and is to be paid in installments as a result of the dispute over the energy reduction effect of the product specified in the instant supply contract (i.e., to save at least 25% in comparison with the previous month after installing a Na-type heat exchange machine).

As the Defendant did not collect the above money from F, on September 21, 2012, applied for a payment order against F to F with the District Court 2012 tea4003, which sought payment of KRW 22,000,000,000. On October 9, 2012, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the Plaintiff as the Suwon District Court of Suwon-si, Suwon District Court 2012 tea755, which sought payment for the said money. The above payment order became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted 1 by the parties is the owner of the instant private loan and the nominal business owner. However, in fact, the Plaintiff is merely the lessor who leased the instant private loan or building to F. The supply contract and the confirmation document of the instant case.