1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

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

3...

1. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff is obligated to pay the said construction cost and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, jointly and severally with the above C, as the nominal owner under Article 24 of the Commercial Act, since the Plaintiff had the Plaintiff operate the business under the name of the Defendant even if the Defendant did not operate D, the Defendant is jointly and severally obligated to pay the said construction cost and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, by setting the cost of construction KRW 13 million as the cost of construction from among F new construction works in Gangwon-do Crossing-gun E (hereinafter “instant construction work”).

B. Defendant 1) D is an enterprise operated by C, and the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for the instant construction from C, and the Defendant does not have any duty to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff. 2) Even if the Defendant is a nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act, since the Plaintiff knew of such fact or was unaware of such fact due to gross negligence, it is unreasonable to recognize the Defendant’s liability as the nominal lender.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence No. 2 and evidence No. 3 as to whether the Defendant is a party to the instant construction contract, the Defendant is the business owner of “D” in indoor architecture interior interior interior interior interior interior interior interior, etc., and at the time the Plaintiff receives a subcontract for the instant construction project, the fact that the name of “D Company C director” was stated as “D Company C director” at the time the Plaintiff received a contract for the instant

However, when adding the overall purport of the pleadings to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the following circumstances, namely, ① the plaintiff was recognized as C by the actual operator of Eul, and ② the defendant entered into the instant construction contract.