1. The request is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff provided a loan-related document to Defendant A for the application for a bank loan.

However, the Defendants forged a sales contract, etc. for the device in the name of the Plaintiff, registered 47 circuits on the est telecom, and received a claim for the communications fee from the relevant communications company. Since the Plaintiff was unable to obtain the Seoul Policy because it was not possible to obtain the Seoul Policy, the Defendants suffered damages equivalent to KRW 30 million, such as failure to receive the contract, and thus, jointly and severally liable for such damages.

2. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of an obligation against the judgment est Telecom, the decision of recommending reconciliation became final and conclusive (the fact that there is no dispute) so that the est Telecom did not claim the Plaintiff the payment of the terminal price and the monetary fee, and there is no damage caused by the Plaintiff’s subscription to the telephone line. There is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff’s failure to receive the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Policy was due to the Defendants’ act, and it cannot be readily concluded that the Plaintiff could have been able to receive the construction contract as a matter of course on the ground that the Plaintiff could have been issued the Seoul Guarantee Insurance Policy, and thus,