beta
Text
1. The part against the defendant B in the judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is dismissed.
2...
Reasons
1. On November 14, 2013, the Defendants: (a) were married couple; (b) deposited KRW 10 million in the passbook of Defendant B under the Plaintiff’s name; and (c) Defendant B borrowed KRW 20 million from the Plaintiff on December 14, 2013 (Evidence 1; hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”); and (d) the Defendant C’s joint guarantee is recognized by comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) there is no dispute between the parties concerned; or (b) the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in the evidence No. 1, No. 8, and No. 1.
2. Summary of the parties' arguments
A. On November 201, 2013, Plaintiff B lent the money for the party funeral business to Defendant B to the Plaintiff on the first time, and the Plaintiff loaned KRW 20 million to Defendant B under the joint and several guarantee of Defendant C, and received the instant loan certificate on November 14, 2013.
B. Defendant B did not borrow money from the Plaintiff or take part in the preparation of the loan certificate of this case, and Defendant C, the husband, prepared a loan certificate under his name, but only is the case where Defendant B was named as the principal obligor at the Plaintiff’s request.
3. Determination
A. There is no dispute between the parties that the seal affixed on the loan certificate of this case against Defendant B is affixed with the seal of Defendant B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff recognized the fact that Defendant C affixed the seal of Defendant B on the loan certificate of this case.
(2) In the event that an act of affixing a seal on a document is carried out by a person other than the person under whose name the document is drawn up, the authenticity of the seal shall be presumed, barring any special circumstances. However, the actual presumption of the establishment of the above authenticity is broken if it is revealed that the act of affixing a seal is carried out by the person other than the person under whose name the document is drawn up. Therefore, the person under whose name the document is drawn up shall bear the burden of proving that the act of affixing a seal is
(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da69686 delivered on April 8, 2003, etc.). Therefore, Defendant C is justified.