beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Both claims;
A. The Plaintiff asserted from February 3, 2003 to September 10, 2010, the Plaintiff lent KRW 1.09 billion to the Defendant over 20 billion. around October 2010, the Plaintiff received a loan certificate of KRW 1.098 billion out of each of the above loans from Defendant representative director D (hereinafter “each of the instant loans”). On May 13, 201, the Plaintiff was recognized as a loan of KRW 2.08 million, which was actually issued by the Defendant’s board of directors to the Defendant.
Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff at least KRW 1 billion, equivalent to the amount stated in each of the instant loan certificates, as well as damages for delay. The Defendant is obligated to claim KRW 200,000,000, which is part of the above KRW 98,000,000, and damages for delay.
B. The defendant's assertion that the defendant did not borrow the amount claimed by the plaintiff from the plaintiff, and the meeting minutes of the board of directors related to each of the above loans in this case are forged, and D, which prepared each of the above loans, was a joint representative director at the time of preparation, and therefore D's act of preparing each of the above loans alone has no effect on the defendant as the act of
2. Determination
A. Whether each of the instant loans was forged or falsified by the Defendant’s each of the instant loans (No. 1-1-17) or not, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge that each of the above loans was forged. Rather, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the witness D’s testimony, each of the above loans was written with the consent of D at the time of the Plaintiff’s joint representative director, who is the Plaintiff’s husband and the agent, around October 2010, and therefore, the Defendant’s defense of forgery is without merit.
B. However, even if the authenticity of each of the loans in this case is recognized as to the Plaintiff’s claim for loans, the disputed facts, the evidence submitted by both parties, and the witness D’s testimony are all the arguments.