대여금
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
The purport and purport of the appeal [the purport of the appeal]
1. The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows, and it is identical to the reasoning for the judgment of the first instance except for the modification of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
At the end of the 12th century, the instant agreement is “i.e., the document that the Plaintiff and the Defendant conspired and prepares with each other, or the instant agreement is not a true intention but a false declaration of intention.
In addition, the first 3 conduct on the fourth th son and the second 3 son and the second son and the second son.
A. The Defendant’s first 7 conduct of the fourth party 4 to the Plaintiff “the Defendant” to the Defendant.
P. At the end of the first instance of the fifth page, the Defendant sent the D’s text message to the Plaintiff on the date of interest (including the D’s text message, etc. on January 27, 2017) “The Defendant committed the crime of “the Defendant against the D’s text message.” The Defendant sent the D’s text message to the Defendant on September 12, 2017, i.e., how the Plaintiff was sleep, slick, and slicked, slick, and slicked, and read, i.e., how the Plaintiff was slick, slick, and slicked, and slickly lent political funds to South Korea, i.e., whether the Defendant was slick, slick, and d’s text message, etc.). The following is added. The Defendant’s assertion of false conspiracy
The establishment of the instant agreement does not conflict between the parties.
However, the defendant asserts that its contents are false.
The part of the instant agreement that the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant does not correspond to the date of “loan,” but it is natural to prepare a certificate concerning the previous loan, and thus, the mere fact that the date and time of lease are not consistent cannot be deemed as not having been correct even if the Plaintiff lent a total of KRW 100 million to the Defendant.
2.3
Of the written agreement of this case, the part that the Defendant agreed to repay total of KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff is proven as to the circumstantial facts suspected of establishing the authenticity of the content thereof.