The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. The ground for appeal by the plaintiff citing the judgment of the court of first instance is not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the relevant part of the judgment of first instance are justified even if the evidence adopted in the court of first instance added the evidence additionally submitted.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the following dismissal or addition. Thus, this court cites it by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Paragraph 1-b of the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance which is dismissed or added is as follows.

“The Deceased was hospitalized or treated at the time of the transfer of the hospital, E hospital, F hospital, etc. due to chronic renal failure, heart failure, etc., and was hospitalized at G Hospital on May 30, 2019, but died at around 04:30 on June 15, 2019.” No. 13 of the first instance judgment of “(2) of the first instance judgment,” and “the same day(2)” were added to “the date on which the instant loan certificate was prepared.”

Part 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance 2-

B. (1) In the last part of paragraph (1), the “(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da56573, Oct. 25, 2012)” is added. The fourth and twenty-one of the first instance judgment “(the Plaintiff is no longer or no longer the Deceased)” is deleted. The fifth and fourth of the fifth instance judgment added the following contents between “in comprehensive case,” and “the Defendant”. Even if there was no “the Deceased’s 40 million won, such as the language and text of the copy of the loan certificate of this case,” it is reasonable to deem that the Deceased prepared the instant loan certificate to recognize that the Defendant was liable to pay the amount equivalent to the amount stated in the instant loan certificate.

Therefore, barring special circumstances where the existence and content of the expression of intent to bear the above liability can be denied, barring special circumstances.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed.