2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

(B) The fact that there is no dispute over A CB (based on recognition)

2. The parties' assertion

A. According to the Plaintiff’s loan certificate, it can be acknowledged that the Plaintiff’s loan of KRW 100 million to the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant seeks payment of KRW 17.8 million out of the outstanding amount of KRW 100 million.

B. The Defendant’s seal affixed to the loan certificate of this case is not a stamp affixed with the Defendant’s seal, but there is no seal affixed by the Defendant on the loan certificate of this case. Thus, the authenticity of the loan certificate of this case is not recognized.

3. Determination

A. 1) Whether the authenticity of the loan certificate of this case (A No. 3) is established or not, i.e., if a seal imprint affixed to the document concerned is affixed by his/her seal, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the seal imprint shall be presumed to have been established, i.e., if the act of affixing the seal is presumed to be based on the will of the person who prepared the document, barring any special circumstance. Once the authenticity of the seal imprints is presumed to be established, the entire document shall be presumed to have been established. However, the above presumption is true if it is proved that the act of affixing the seal was done by a person other than the person who prepared the document. Thus, the person who submitted the document bears the responsibility to prove that the act of affixing the seal is based on a legitimate title delegated by the person who prepared the document (Supreme Court Decision 2002Da69686, Apr. 8, 2003). Thus, the presumption that the act of affixing the seal imprint is based on the will of the person who prepared the document.