A. On October 28, 2014, the Plaintiff decided to lend KRW 600 million (hereinafter “instant loan”) to B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”).

(hereinafter “instant monetary loan agreement”). (b)

As the head of the branch office of the Defendant Bank C, D, the manager of the Defendant Bank, is the manager of the Defendant Bank, at the same day’s branch office, the name is “written confirmation of subrogation payment”, and the content is “payment of KRW 600 million to the Plaintiff by November 11, 2014,” and the preparing person, “Defendant Bank C Branch D”, written the documents indicated as “Defendant Bank C Branch D,” and affixed the seal impression of the branch office and branch office, and signed and delivered them to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “this case’s confirmation document”). D at the time of the preparation and issuance of the instant confirmation document, delivered to the Plaintiff a copy of the Defendant’s corporate seal impression certificate, D’s resident registration certificate, and C’s name cards.

C. On October 28, 2014, the Plaintiff paid KRW 500 million out of the instant loans to E, the representative director of B, and paid the remainder KRW 100 million on the following day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 17 (Evidence No. 3) (the document No. 3 is presumed to have been established as a whole because there is no dispute over the stamp image of defendant bank C Branch and Branch D). The defendant asserts that the document was prepared by the plaintiff's coercion, but it is not sufficient to recognize the above argument only with the descriptions No. 1, 2-1, 3-1, and 2, Eul evidence No. 3-2, and the purport of the whole argument as a whole.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1D constitutes a manager under the Commercial Act who has the authority to conduct all acts related to the Defendant’s business, and D’s preparation and delivery of the instant confirmation document to the Plaintiff is a debt guarantee act under Article 27-2 of the Banking Act, and is within the scope of the Defendant’s business.