The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

A. On June 26, 2001, C borrowed KRW 3,500,000 from the Plaintiff, and written a certificate of borrowed money (hereinafter “the certificate of borrowed money”) with the interest rate of July 25, 2001 and the interest rate of 8% per month, and each of which was set at 3,50,000 won (hereinafter “the certificate of borrowed money”). However, in the column of joint and several sureties of the certificate of borrowed money, the name of the Defendant is stated, and the stamp image is deemed to be based on the seal of the Defendant’s name is stated above, and the Defendant’s workplace and address, the Defendant’s workplace, home, and hand-on phone number

B. On February 15, 2003, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order with the Seoul District Court Decision 2003Da6473, which sought the performance of joint and several surety obligation pursuant to the loan certificate of this case. On March 7, 2003, the payment order was issued to the Plaintiff that "the obligor (the Defendant) shall pay to the obligee (the Plaintiff) 7,140,000 won and 3,500,000 won, calculated at the rate of 25% per annum per annum from the day after the original copy of the payment order was served to the day of full payment," and the above payment order was served on March 24, 2003 and confirmed on April 8, 2003.

(A) it is not confirmed that the original copy of the above payment order has been served. (c)

On May 9, 2012, the Plaintiff applied for a payment order for the performance of joint and several liability obligations under the loan instrument of this case by Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012 tea30782, which was the interruption of prescription, and the Plaintiff again applied for a payment order for the performance of joint and several liability pursuant to the loan instrument of this case. The said payment order was impossible to serve the original copy, and was implemented as the litigation procedure

[Reasons for Recognition] The substantial facts in this Court, Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the lawsuit in this case requires the performance of the joint and several sureties obligation under the loan certificate, while the defendant asserts that he did not affix his seal on the loan certificate in this case.

3. Determination

A. Since a final and conclusive favorable judgment has res judicata effect, such as interruption of prescription.