A. Defendant B, as Defendant C’s children, was operating a farming association corporation D (hereinafter “instant association”).

B. The Plaintiff loaned money of KRW 30 million to Defendant B’s account on June 1, 201, KRW 130 million on August 13, 2011, KRW 19.4 million on August 17, 2011, KRW 20 million on August 21, 2011, KRW 20 million on August 21, 201, KRW 20 million on October 14, 201, KRW 20 million on April 12, 201, KRW 16, KRW 100,000 on April 16, 201, and KRW 80,000 on September 10, 201, which was operated by the Defendants, to the extent that the Defendants loaned the business funds of the instant association.

C. As to the above monetary transaction, Defendant B prepared a monetary loan certificate with the Plaintiff’s maturity of KRW 100 million as of December 16, 201, and Defendant C written his/her own signature as a joint and several surety; ② on June 29, 2012, “A loan with the Plaintiff’s maturity of KRW 120 million as of June 29, 2015,” and Defendant C written his/her own signature as a joint and several surety; ③ on October 26, 2012, “A loan with the Plaintiff’s maturity of KRW 30 million as of October 26, 2013,” and Defendant C written a monetary loan certificate with the Plaintiff’s signature and seal affixed it on the joint and several surety, and issued each of the above monetary loan certificate to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without a partial dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 10 (the number of pages is included; hereinafter the same shall apply). The defendants asserted that defendant Eul arbitrarily affixed Eul's seal to Eul's 3 (the column of joint and several sureties of the monetary tea certificate), but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, and the defendants are the same as the defendant's seal. Thus, the defendants' assertion in this part is without merit.

Where it is recognized that the seal imprinted in a document is a seal affixed to the document, the seal shall be presumed to have been affixed by the person who prepared the document, unless there are special circumstances, and once it is presumed to have been affixed by the person who prepared the document, Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act.