1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim on this part is dismissed.

2. Action.

1. The basic facts are: (a) the Plaintiff, on February 25, 2003, remitted to the National Bank Account under the name of the Defendant (number D: hereinafter “Defendant’s account”); (b) KRW 12 million on February 26, 2003; (c) KRW 3 million on June 10, 2003; (d) KRW 80 million on July 14, 2003; (e) KRW 17 million on July 18, 2003; and (e) KRW 2,50,000,000 on August 18, 2003; and (e) KRW 18,50,000 on the Defendant’s seal imprint (hereinafter “Defendant’s seal imprint”); and (e) the Defendant’s seal imprint (hereinafter “the Defendant’s signature”). The Defendant’s seal imprint affixed under the name of the Defendant’s (hereinafter “this case”).

차용증 일금 일억 이천만 원을 A 氏에게 2003년 7月 15日 차용합니다.

F B (Signature) Dongjak-gu 101 Dong 504 / [Reasons for Recognition] Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Claim for return of loan;

A. The plaintiff asserts that he, at his request, remitted money to the defendant's account in the name of the defendant and lent it to the defendant, and that he received the certificate of the loan in this case signed by the defendant with his own seal imprint affixed by the defendant on August 2003. The plaintiff asserts that he received the loan of KRW 120 million from the defendant and the payment of interest or delay damages.

Accordingly, the defendant, as a class 1 visually disabled person who cannot see himself at all, did not place his seal imprint on the loan certificate of this case either directly or through another group of persons, and the defendant, as a class 1 visually disabled person, did not take the seal imprint on the loan certificate of this case, and the defendant, as well as the defendant, who received money from the plaintiff, while managing and using the defendant's name account.

B. If the seal imprinted by the holder’s seal affixed on a private document of the relevant legal doctrine is affixed with his/her seal, it is presumed that the act of affixing the seal is based on the intention of the holder of the title deed, barring any special circumstance. Once the authenticity of the seal is presumed to be established, the authenticity of the document is presumed to be established in accordance with Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act, but such authenticity is established.