1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 6,500,000 as well as its full payment from February 25, 2016.

1. The plaintiff was prepared and delivered by the defendant's husband deceased C (hereinafter "the deceased"). The letter of the payment in this case states that "the above amount shall be paid by B and shall not be accused of the husband C", and the defendant's name is written and sealed next to the letter of payment in this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1 (U.S. written rejection, defendant asserts that this document was forged, but the authenticity is recognized for the following reasons) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff lent KRW 6,500,000 to the deceased, and the defendant affixed a seal on the letter of payment to the effect that he would substitute for the borrowed money of the deceased, so the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the borrowed money of KRW 6,500,000 and the delay damages therefor.

B. The defendant's assertion does not have any signature or seal on the letter of payment of this case or the letter of payment of this case. Thus, the plaintiff is not liable to pay the borrowed money of the deceased.

3. Determination

A. In a case where it is recognized that the seal affixed to a document is the seal affixed to the legal reasoning of the holder of the title deed, barring special circumstances, the establishment of the seal imprint shall be presumed to have been made based on the will of the holder of the title deed, i.e., the act of affixing the seal. On the other hand, when the authenticity of the seal is presumed, the authenticity of the document shall be presumed to have been made in accordance with Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act, so the person who asserts that the document is forged

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 81Da684, Aug. 24, 1982; 2001Da72029, Feb. 25, 2002). In addition, insofar as the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the court may deny the contents of the statement.