1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is engaged in the business of manufacturing Aluminium pressure with the trade name “E”.

B is a corporation that is engaged in content, manufacturing, wholesale and retail business, etc., Defendant C is an internal director, and Defendant D’s wife is a shareholder who has acquired 1,500 shares out of 5,000 shares issued at the time of establishment of B.

B. From February 14, 2014 to January 7, 2017, the Plaintiff supplied Aluminium products to B, and the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 85,816,210 in total amount of the goods up to the date.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. Determination

A. In light of the Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant D is the actual manager of Defendant B, and Defendant C is a representative in the name of Defendant C and is a pro-Japanese relationship. In light of the details of the payment and expenditure of shares in B, and the relationship between Defendant D and the shareholder F, it is only an individual company in the external form of a legal entity and actually controlled by the Defendants.

Therefore, in accordance with the legal principle of denial of legal personality, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid amount of goods.

B. Where the judgment company has the external form of a juristic person, but it merely takes the form of a juristic person, and in substance, it is merely an individual enterprise of a person behind the corporate body, or it is used without permission for the purpose of avoiding the application of the laws against the person behind the corporate body, the denial of the responsibility of the person behind the corporate body by asserting that even if the act of the company is an act of the company, it shall be attributed only to the company on the ground that the person behind the corporate body is a separate character, and thus, it is not permissible against the justice and equity as an abuse of the corporate body in violation of the principle of trust and good faith.