A. Around February 2014, the Plaintiff concluded a temporary re-lease agreement with Defendant B to lease the temporary materials required at the construction site performed by Defendant B to Defendant B.

According to the lease contract, the defendant (the appointed party, the following "the defendant") written in C as a joint and several surety.

around that time, Defendant B had been entrusted with the management of the construction site of reinforced concrete in the net E Hospital built by Defendant B (hereinafter referred to as “the site of the hospital”) by Defendant C, and the preparation of the actual contract was conducted between F and Defendant C, the Plaintiff’s agent, and the agent of Defendant B.

B. Around that time, the Plaintiff prepared a new temporary re-lease agreement with Defendant C, along with the name of Defendant C and the name and the resident registration number of the selected party D, along with the indication of the “party” on the front and rear the signature of the contract.

However, the part related to the “designatedr D” in the above contract is arbitrarily stated by Defendant C without the delegation or permission of Defendant C.

Defendant C, along with the above E Hospital construction site, was in charge of the construction of the construction site in net G (hereinafter referred to as “G site”).

The plaintiff was also F in charge of preparing this Agreement on behalf of the plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, part of Gap evidence 10, witness H's testimony, witness F's testimony, witness F's testimony, whole purport Gap evidence 10, which are lack to recognize the authenticity of the part of the signature of the Appointed as evidence to acknowledge the facts premised on Eul's own signature since there is no other evidence to prove that the signature of the part is D, unlike the record, it cannot be used as evidence to acknowledge the facts premised on Eul's own signature. In light of the purport of the entire pleadings, defendant C's name is indicated on behalf of defendant C, but the above facts are stated according to fact-finding as mentioned above.