The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the submission of documents must be the original, and the submission of evidence by only a copy is not the original, but the mere copy is inappropriate in principle as there is no guarantee of accuracy. Thus, the existence of the original and the authenticity of the establishment of the original cannot be substituted by a copy if there is a dispute over the other party and there is an objection against the other party as to the substitution of the original. On the other hand, if a copy is submitted as the original, the copy shall not be an independent documentary evidence, but it shall not be deemed that the original has been submitted by the independent documentary evidence. In this case, there is no evidence beyond that there is a copy of these contents, unless there is an original like the copy by evidence and it is recognized that the original has been genuine.

However, as a copy of the document, the party applying for the document lost the original document.

If the document is damaged in good faith, or if a third party who does not have an obligation to comply with the order to submit the document holds the original of the document, it is impossible to submit the original document or is not required to submit the original in an unforeseeable situation, such as where the original is a document of a large quantity, etc. However, in such cases, the applicant party to the document must prove and prove the specific reasons why the submission of the original document would be legitimate.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da66133, Aug. 23, 2002; Supreme Court Decision 2014Da29667, Sept. 26, 2014). The lower court held that with respect to “a copy of the written agreement” submitted by the Plaintiff as a evidence No. 2, there is a lack of proof of the Plaintiff’s assertion on the specific grounds for which the submission of the original copy is legitimate.