beta
Text
The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is that the court added F’s testimony to the witness of the court of first instance who is consistent with the plaintiff’s assertion but is hard to believe it, and that the parties’ dispute surrounding the disposition document is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following additional determination as to the dispute of the parties surrounding the disposition document of receipt, and thus, citing it as it is
(The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff are not significantly different from the allegations in the judgment of the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate). 2. The plaintiff asserts that the receipt is a reported document, while the defendant asserts that the receipt is a disposal document.
It is necessary for the public law or private law to prove a certain document as a disposal document to be a disposal document. Even if the contents of the document are related to the person's own legal act, if the legal act is reported and described as an external fact, or the opinion or appreciation thereof is stated, it is not a disposal document but a disposal document.
(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following facts are revealed: (a) the receipt is a document that stated the fact that the person who prepared the receipt received the money, and thus, does not per se prove any legal act (off-off or repayment). However, such distinction is beneficial to taking into account the material evidence of the document; and (b) the document is proved to have been a juristic act by recognizing the existence of a legal act that constitutes the content of the document, barring any special circumstance where the authenticity is recognized (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da50520, Apr. 11, 1997). However, even if the authenticity of the reported document is recognized, the document is recorded in the document.