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. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement No. 2-1 of the evidence No. 2 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff lent 120,000,000 won to the co-defendant B of the first instance trial on March 29, 2004, the due date for repayment was April 15, 2004, and interest was 5% monthly, and the defendant can recognize the fact that he guaranteed the above debt No. 2 of October 18, 2004.
According to the above facts, the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay to the plaintiff 120,000,000 won and the damages for delay calculated by the rate of 30% per annum with the plaintiff within the maximum of the highest interest rate provided in the former Interest Limitation Act (amended by Act No. 12227, Jan. 14, 2014) from April 15, 2004 to the date of full payment, which the plaintiff sought from April 15, 2004.
2. The defendant's defense of the exemption of obligation is a defense that the plaintiff did not have any obligation to pay the above money to the plaintiff because the plaintiff exempted the defendant from the above joint and several liability.
The evidence No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the "written confirmation of this case") contains a statement that the Plaintiff had exempted the Defendant from the Defendant's joint and several liability, but denies the authenticity of the entire document by denying that the Plaintiff, who is the title holder, affixed the Plaintiff's seal affixed on the written confirmation of this case, was withdrawn by the Plaintiff's seal, and thus, the burden of proving the authenticity is on the Defendant.
On November 18, 2004, the fact that the certificate of this case was sent to the defendant by facsimile by the J, a corporation, the representative director of which was the plaintiff at that time, was sent to the defendant by November 18, 2004, is not a dispute between the parties, but it is insufficient to recognize that the above fact alone is that the stamp image affixed on the certificate of this case was sent by the plaintiff's seal, and there is no other evidence to recognize it, subparagraph 1 cannot be used as
In addition, according to the statement of Eul evidence No. 2 and testimony of the first instance witness F, the plaintiff F of the first instance trial witness shall pay money to Eul.