beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the part concerning the 4th to 5th to 4th to 5th to 6th to 8th to 13th to 6th to 6th to 13th to 4th to 6th to 4th to 6th to 4th to 6th to 12th to 4th to 4th to 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus
2. Part 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance, which was written by the court of first instance, was written from Nos. 17 to No. 5 of the judgment, 1) The plaintiff asserted as follows and claimed against the defendant that the defendant is liable to pay the defendant a total of KRW 75 million in loans to a company bank among the debts in the D convalescent hospital, and KRW 24,061,580 in the amount of goods payment obligations to K, plus KRW 99,061,580 in the amount of goods payment obligations to K, and damages for delay. (A) The defendant agreed to succeed to all obligations in the D convalescent hospital while taking over the D convalescent hospital from the plaintiff, and thus, the defendant is liable
B) In addition, the Defendant granted the right to prepare the instant payment note to E with the terms of an agreement on the payment of the above loans and the goods payment obligations, and accordingly, E prepared and delivered the instant payment note to the Plaintiff under the name of the Defendant. Even if there was no authority to prepare the instant payment note to E, the Defendant is liable for the payment of the said money to the Plaintiff. Even if there was no authority to prepare the instant payment note, the Defendant is liable to act as an expression agent beyond the authority under Article 126 of the Civil Act. Therefore, the Defendant is liable for the payment of the said money to the Plaintiff. On the other hand, on the other hand, whether the Defendant agreed to perform the above loan obligations and the goods payment obligations by preparing and granting the instant payment note to the Plaintiff via E with the Defendant granted the power of representation.
First, as shown in the plaintiff's above argument, whether the authenticity of Gap evidence No. 2 (the letter of payment in this case) is established is examined as above.