1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates the Plaintiff’s trade name as “B,” and the Defendant is a company engaging in the business of supplying alcoholic beverages.

B. On June 25, 2014, 30,000 won (hereinafter “the instant money”) was remitted from the account under the name of the Defendant (Korean bank C) to the account (Korean bank D) in the name of the Plaintiff.

C. On January 13, 2015, the Defendant asserted the existence of a loan claim against the Plaintiff with respect to the instant money, and filed an application for payment order against the Plaintiff with the Seoul District Court 2015Ra69 (Seoul District Court 2015Da69).

On February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff as the obligor, and the Defendant as the obligee was drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (No. 168 of February 12, 2015, hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with the purport that “the Plaintiff borrowed the instant money from the Defendant on June 25, 2014, and repaid the said money in installments in 2,000,000 won from March 15, 2015 to May 15, 2016.”

The completion of the instant notarial deed is E-, on behalf of both the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the completion of the power of attorney in both the Plaintiff and the Defendant attached to the instant notarial deed is also E, and the part of the said power of attorney was reproduced by E.

E. On February 17, 2015, the Defendant withdrawn the Plaintiff’s application for the payment order, and supplied alcoholic beverages to the main points operated by the Plaintiff from around that time to May 2015.

F. On May 22, 2015, the Defendant drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (No. 593, No. 2015, No. 2015, No. 2015, No. 2015, May 22, 2015) with respect to the instant money delegated by F, the Plaintiff’s wife.

G. Based on the original copy of the instant notarial deed, the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order on the Plaintiff’s claim against a third party. On July 28, 2015, the Defendant issued a seizure and collection order (Seoul District Court High Court 2015 Tasan Branch 9037).

H. Meanwhile, G.W.