1. Defendant B’s KRW 111,467,720 as well as 6% per annum from January 25, 2014 to December 29, 2014.

1. On the grounds of the claim, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the outstanding amount pursuant to Article 57(1) of the Commercial Act, given that the Plaintiff supplied the automobile parts by January 24, 2014 pursuant to the goods contract (hereinafter “instant goods contract”), as those who jointly operated the automobile-resistant engine remodeling project (hereinafter “the instant automobile remodeling project”), and the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the outstanding amount.

Preliminaryly, Defendant C operated the instant automobile remodeling business as an independent business operator who is not a member of the general service of Defendant B, who is not a member of the general service of Defendant B, and Defendant B and D borrowed the name of “E” and “F” operated by them, and the Plaintiff supplied the automobile parts to Defendant C with the trust of the said trade name, and thus, Defendant C and B, and D, the principal debtor, are jointly and severally liable to pay the instant outstanding amount pursuant to Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

2. According to the overall purport of the statement and pleading as to the claim against the defendant B, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 4 through 7, and evidence Nos. 12, and the whole purport of the argument as to the goods contract of this case, the following facts are acknowledged: (i) there is no separate contract with respect to the goods contract of this case; (ii) the name of the defendant Eul is registered only by the defendant Eul; (iii) the plaintiff supplied the automobile parts according to the goods contract of this case; and (iv) the fact that the plaintiff was paid several times in the name of the defendant B or E; and therefore, it is reasonable to deem the purchaser of the goods contract of this case as

Meanwhile, according to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 4 through 7 and the whole pleadings, as a result of the plaintiff engaged in the supply business of automobile parts continuously supplied automobile parts to the defendant B under the instant goods contract, 111,467,720 won = the outstanding amount before July 2013.