1. If the principal debtor directly puts his/her signature and seal on the loan-related documents, this would have expressed his/her intention to the financial institution as the debtor under the loan-loan contract. However, if there are special circumstances under which not only the economic effects under the loan-loan contract but also the legal effects may be inferred to other persons, it may be deemed that there is no difference between the truth and indication

In such a case, if a financial institution, which is the other party, knew or could have known the other party's actual intention, such declaration of intention is invalid not by intention but by declaration of intention.

In order to recognize the existence of such special circumstances in a specific case, it shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the accord between the borrower and the nominal lender’s interest, whether the loan was actually paid, whether the nominal lender was actually paid the loan, whether the loan was made based on the credit of the nominal lender or the actual borrower’s security was provided, whether the loan was conducted, whether the loan was conducted, the degree of the credit investigation on the nominal lender’s loan, the degree of the investigation, whether the loan was urged to pay the loan to the nominal lender according to the overdue payment of the loan, the details of the loan lending, and the job of the nominal lender

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da8403, Jul. 25, 1997; 2008Da77772, 7789, Jun. 12, 2008). 2. Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveals the following facts.

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “D”) was a starting construction of the C Apartment (hereinafter referred to as “C”) on the ground of the Busan Suwon-gu and 38 lots of land, which was implemented by the CJ Construction (hereinafter referred to as “C”).

B. D’s officers and employees and part payments loans 1D and Calwal Construction, upon entering into a loan agreement with the Plaintiff around July 2007, and the Plaintiff.