대여금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The defendant's main grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance. In light of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of
Therefore, the reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows, except for the case’s assertion emphasized by the Defendant in this court to add the following “Supplementary judgment”, and therefore, this court’s explanation is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Supplementary judgment
A. Although there is no dispute over the fact that, after the Defendant’s assertion on the loan certificate (No. 1) of this case, the stamp image following the Defendant’s name is based on the seal of the Defendant, the C living together with the Defendant at the time of the preparation of the loan certificate of this case is affixed with the Defendant’s seal and affixed the Defendant’s seal on the loan certificate of this case.
Therefore, since the act of sealing the defendant's seal on the loan certificate of this case is not based on the defendant's intention, the loan certificate of this case is forged.
B. According to the reasoning of the judgment, Eul evidence No. 6-2, and the testimony of the party witness C, C bears the defendant's seal and affixed his/her seal on the loan certificate of this case.
However, according to the above evidence, it is reasonable to view that the loan certificate of this case was prepared on the basis of the defendant's intention, since C knew that it borrowed money from the plaintiff for the purpose of purchasing a truck, opened a new account in the name of the defendant before borrowing money from the plaintiff, used part of the borrowed money deposited from the plaintiff to the above account, and disposed of the cargo vehicle purchased from the above borrowed money.
In the case where the Defendant filed a criminal complaint against C with the charge of forging the loan certificate, on the ground that “C does not have any knowledge about the preparation of the loan certificate of this case, and seems to have implicitly consented to the preparation of the loan certificate of this case.”