beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The assertion and judgment
A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant borrowed a total of KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff on or around October 2016 and around November 2016 (hereinafter “the instant loan”). On December 1, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant sought payment of the instant loan and damages for delay by failing to repay it on several occasions.
On the other hand, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff did not borrow the above money from the plaintiff and the seal affixed to the loan certificate of this case was stolen, so it is impossible to respond to the plaintiff's request.
B. According to the statement in Gap's evidence No. 1, the loan certificate of this case contains "amounting to 30 million won, the borrower, and the borrower", and it is recognized that the defendant's seal affixed on the name side of the defendant's name.
However, barring any special circumstance, if the stamp image affixed on a document is printed out by his seal, the authenticity of the stamp image shall be presumed to have been created, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person who prepared the document, and once the authenticity of the stamp image is presumed, the authenticity of the document shall be presumed to have been created. However, such presumption is broken if it is revealed that the act of affixing the seal was carried out by a person other than the person who prepared the document. Thus, the person who signed the document bears the responsibility to prove that the act of affixing the stamp image is based on a legitimate title delegated by the person who signed the document (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37831, Sept. 24, 2009). The fact that the act of affixing the stamp image was carried out by a person other than the defendant, as there is no dispute between the parties (the second date of pleading) and in order to be presumed to have the authentic authenticity of the stamp image in this case pursuant to the above