1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff stated in the complaint around August 5, 2014 at the complaint around 1998, but in light of the contents stated in the complaint or the application for payment order submitted as reference documents, it appears that the time was about 1998 and that August 5, 2014 appears to be obvious clerical errors.

The non-party C promised to lend money and issued a certificate of personal seal impression and seal to his female.

B. However, C did not pay KRW 4 million to the Plaintiff, even though it prepared a loan certificate (the debtor C, the obligee, the obligee, and the borrowed amount of KRW 4 million) with the Plaintiff as a joint and several surety after delivering the certificate and seal received as above to the Defendant.

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant does not exist.

On the basis of the loan certificate stated in paragraph (1), Busan District Court Decision 2014Da35956 against the defendant's plaintiff shall not be subject to compulsory execution based on the executory payment order.

2. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff is insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise. Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion is acknowledged, as seen in the assertion itself or the reference materials presented by the Plaintiff, insofar as it is acknowledged that “the Plaintiff asked C to borrow money, and accordingly issued a certificate of the personal seal impression and a certificate of the personal seal impression to use money,” the mere fact that the borrowed money was not delivered by C cannot deny the validity of the loan certificate drawn up based on the Plaintiff’s intent. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be seen as false or groundless.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.