1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasons why the court should explain in this decision are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the cases where part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is changed as stated in the following Paragraph (2). Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(Provided, That the part on the joint defendant B of the first instance court without filing an appeal shall be excluded); 2. The part after repair

(a)No. 4.12 of the judgment of the first instance court is written with the following parts: "No. 4. 5 (including paper numbers)" in Part 12 of the judgment of the first instance.

【A’s certificate Nos. 4 and 5 (including a number with which a serial number exists; the Defendant, at a trial, has forged the part of the Defendant’s name among the joint and several suretiess attached to the above A’s certificate (hereinafter “instant certificate”) from among the joint and several suretiess attached to the above A’s certificate at the trial, and the Defendant, at the first trial, acknowledged the authenticity of the evidence No. 5 from the first instance trial, but asserts that it is revoked because it is contrary to

Although confessions as to the formation of documents are confessions as to the facts of assistance, the revocation of confessions as to other indirect facts should be treated the same as the revocation of confessions of major facts, unlike the revocation of confessions as to other indirect facts, so the party who recognized the authenticity of documents cannot freely withdraw this.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da5654 Decided April 24, 2001, etc.). However, since the fact that the Defendant recognized the authenticity of the entire evidence No. 5, including the instant confirmation at the first date for pleading of the first instance court, is apparent in the record, the Defendant cannot freely withdraw the establishment of the authenticity.

I would like to say.

① In addition, according to the result of the examination of the seal of the appraiser I and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendant’s delegation of all authority to the KJ as to the preparation of the Notarial Deed to the Korean Law Firm, a notary public, to the KJ as of January 14, 2013.