beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
Facts of recognition
The plaintiff is a company with the purpose of wholesale and retail business of agriculture and livestock products, and the defendant is a person who has registered his business with the trade name of "C" (hereinafter referred to as "the store of this case") in Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.
On September 20, 2014, the Plaintiff supplied goods equivalent to KRW 1,789,097, such as murdering overlaps with the instant store.
[Ground of recognition] The plaintiff asserts that there is no dispute, Gap evidence No. 1-4, and the purport of the whole pleadings that the plaintiff is obligated to pay the price of the goods to the plaintiff as the party to the goods supply contract or the nominal lender.
Accordingly, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant store was not operated by the Defendant, and that it was withdrawn from the association agreement on the operation of the instant store around July 2013, the Defendant did not be liable for the payment of goods, and that the Plaintiff knew or could have known the fact that the Plaintiff was merely a nominal lender.
Judgment
A person who has permitted another person to run his/her business in his/her name or trade name shall be jointly and severally liable to pay back to the third person, who has transacted with him/her mistakenly as the owner of the business
(Article 24 of the Commercial Act. Such liability of the nominal lender is to protect a third party who trades by misunderstanding the nominal owner as an employer, and thus, is not liable if the third party, who is the other party to the transaction, knew of, or was grossly negligent in, the nominal owner.
At this time, the nominal lender who claims exemption shall bear the burden of proving whether the other party to the transaction knew or was grossly negligent for the other party to the transaction.
(2) In light of the above-mentioned facts and the overall purport of the pleading, it is recognized that the Defendant lent its name so that it can operate the instant store to D, etc. in addition to the overall purport of the pleading.
Thus, the defendant is the nominal name holder of the goods supplied by the plaintiff to the store of this case.