대여금
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the defendant makes a decision on the assertion added or emphasized by the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence
2. Additional determination
A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Plaintiff was unable to submit the original copy of the evidence No. 1 (money tea certificate), and that the Plaintiff failed to prove the legitimacy of the submission of the original copy. Thus, the evidence No. 1 cannot be used as evidence.
In addition, the contract date (the next date) of Gap's certificate No. 1 (the money borrowed certificate), and the amount column was forged after August 30, 2006, which is the actual date of the borrowed certificate.
B. Determination 1) When submitting or sending a document to a court, the original, original, or certified copy shall be deemed to be the original, certified, or certified copy (Article 355(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). Thus, the submission of evidence is unlawful, in principle, as there is no accurate guarantee. In particular, in the event there is a dispute over the existence of the original and the authenticity of the original establishment, and there is an objection against the other party in regard to the substitution of the original, the copy cannot be substituted by the original. On the other hand, if the copy is submitted as the original, the copy shall not be deemed to be an independent documentary evidence, but the original shall not be deemed to have been submitted by it, but in this case, the original shall be deemed to have been in existence with the same original as the original with evidence, and the submission of the original shall be recognized as having been duly constituted (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da23092, Sep. 20, 196; 2007Da524, Mar. 12, 2009).