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 reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is that the defendant's argument is identical to the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the defendant's decision as to this case as follows. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article

[Supplementary portion] The defendant asserts that although the fishery products owned by two-sex fishery were loaned KRW 30 million from the plaintiff as collateral, the plaintiff's employee in charge of credit was recruited with the defendant's employee in charge of accounting and then forged the loan application, loan extension application, etc. with the defendant's seal impression affixed.

Where it is recognized that the seal stamped on a document has been affixed by the seal of the holder of the title deed, barring special circumstances, it shall be presumed that the authenticity of the seal imprint was made based on the will of the holder of the title deed, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is made, and once the authenticity of the seal is presumed to have been made, the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been made pursuant to Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore, the person who asserts that the document has been forged

(2) In the case of this case, each of the above applications is presumed to have been made on the basis of the defendant's will, barring any special circumstance, and the evidence submitted by the defendant alone is insufficient to reverse the above presumption, and there is no other evidence to prove forgery.

This part of the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

The defendant asserts to the effect that the fishery products offered as security for the loan of this case were disposed of at will at salt prices and appropriated for interest and delay damages.