beta
Text
1. The Defendant: (a) from November 16, 2017, to Plaintiff A, KRW 25,096,793, and KRW 25,096,792, and each of the above amounts.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiffs jointly engage in oil sales business under the trade name “D gas station” in the net time C, and the share ratio as the Plaintiffs’ partners is equal.
B. From August 1, 2017 to November 15, 2017, the Plaintiffs concluded a dump truck stop contract with the Defendant and supplied the transit and the number of elements equivalent to KRW 50,193,585 to the same I dump truck as F, G, the same H, and the same I dump truck at the request of the Defendant E.
[Ground of recognition] 1 to 7 evidence 1 (including each number), witness E's testimony, the purport of the whole pleading
2. As a general rule in determining the cause of a claim belongs to the company the ownership or the right to manage the vehicle externally and thus, even if a branch owner directly operates and manages the vehicle, the branch owner is acting for an act that falls under the ordinary business affairs in the management of the operation with the delegation from the company to manage the operation of the vehicle. Thus, the branch owner is obliged to bear the cost of oil used by the branch owner, barring any special circumstance to deem that a branch owner did not act on behalf of the branch owner with the other party in the transaction of oil supply which falls under ordinary business and that the other party did not intend to act with the company.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 93Da7341, May 27, 1993; 89Meu319, Oct. 27, 1989). According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount of oil arising from the supply of oil by the Plaintiffs to the Plaintiffs, on behalf of the Defendant, by E delegated with the right to operate and manage each dump truck.
(2) The Plaintiff did not have any intention to act as an agent for the Defendant at the time of the instant oil supply transaction, or there is no reason to deem that the Plaintiff had no intention to act with the Defendant. Accordingly, the Defendant is so requested by the Plaintiffs.