1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The Plaintiff was a corporation that sells alcoholic beverages, and supplied alcoholic beverages to a singran bar with the trade name of Jung-gu, Daegu-gu, from July 2015 to September 3, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant transaction”). The amount of alcoholic beverages that the Plaintiff was not supplied to the said C is KRW 15,187,110.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 5 through 9, witness D’s partial testimony, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The Defendant entered into the instant transaction with the Plaintiff, and even if the Defendant is not an actual trader, the Plaintiff is the actual trader, and thus, is obligated to pay the liquor price arising from the instant transaction.

B. The defendant is merely a nominal lender, and the parties to the instant transaction are E and D.

In addition, the Plaintiff did not have any obligation to pay alcoholic beverages, since the Plaintiff knew or was unaware of the fact that the Defendant lent only the name.

3. Determination

A. As to whom the actor and the other party to the contract of this case are the parties to the contract in cases where the actor, who entered into a judgment on the party to the contract of this case, committed a juristic act in the name of another person, the parties to the contract shall first be determined as the party to the contract in accordance with the consent of the actor and the other party. If the other party does not coincide with the intent of the actor and the other party, based on the specific circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, content, purpose, and circumstance of the contract, etc., if the other party is reasonable,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da32120 Decided September 5, 2003, etc.). Comprehensively taking account of the statement Nos. 1 and 4 No. 1 and 4, and the testimony and the whole purport of the testimony and pleading of the witness F of the first instance trial, the Defendant issued the said C store to E around July 2, 2015.