The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal principles as to the value of evidence of a copy of a document, the submission of documents shall be deemed to be the original, and as a matter of principle, the submission of evidence by only a copy shall not be the original, but the submission of a simple copy shall be deemed to be unlawful. Thus, if there is a dispute over the existence of the original and the authenticity of the establishment of the original, and there is an objection from the other party against the other party regarding the substitution of the original, the copy shall not be substituted by the original. On the other hand, if the copy is submitted as the original, the copy shall not be deemed to be an independent documentary evidence, or otherwise, the original shall not be deemed to have been submitted. In this case, there is no evidence above that there is a copy of such content, unless there is

However, the applicant party lost the original document.

If it is damaged in good faith, or if a third party who does not have an obligation to comply with the order to submit the document holds the original of the document, it is impossible to submit the original document, such as where the original is a document of a large quantity, or it is not required to submit the original document, but in such case, it is necessary to prove and prove the specific reasons for recognizing the legitimacy of the submission of the original document by the party applying for the relevant document.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da66133 Decided August 23, 2002, and Supreme Court Decision 2009Da96403 Decided February 25, 201, etc.). The lower court held that “the Defendant, as a joint and several surety, would pay the instant loan loan obligations to B not later than December 31, 2002,” prepared in the name of the Defendant, pursuant to the “ Copy of the Agreement on Joint and Several Guarantee of Debt Repayment” (No. 10 No. 3, hereinafter “the instant documentary evidence”).