1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiffs is a promissory note No. 275 of the 2016 Multiurury Law Firm.

1. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff’s assertion is forged with the Plaintiff’s seal, and the Plaintiff’s design, who is a partner, forged a promissory note causing KRW 300 million to the Plaintiffs and face value (hereinafter “instant promissory note”).

The Defendant also forged the power of attorney in the name of the Plaintiffs (hereinafter “instant power of attorney”), and a notary public prepared a promissory note No. 275 on the 2016 No. 275 of the Multilateral Act (hereinafter “instant No. notarial Deed”) using forged power of attorney.

On the other hand, there is only a fact that Plaintiff B, her husband, issued one copy of the certificate of personal seal impression to Plaintiff B because it is necessary for business, and Plaintiff B merely listened to the purport that “I do not know about the cause of being detained” from the Defendant at the time of the criminal issue and that “I do not know about it,” and issued the certificate of personal seal impression of the Plaintiffs.

Therefore, the instant promissory notes, etc. are all forged and thus, the instant authentic deed is null and void.

2. In light of the following facts as a whole, the judgment on the Plaintiff B’s claim is examined: (a) evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 1-13, and 15; and (b) evidence Nos. 1-13, and 15; and (c) evidence Nos. 1-13 and 15; and (d) evidence No. D’s testimony, the Plaintiff’s part of the No. notarial deed in this case

Plaintiff

B and the Defendant, as a high school establishment, have been engaged in the same trade name car lease business from April 2015 to E, and the Plaintiffs are the married couple.

B. While running the above business, the Defendant lent a considerable amount of money to the Plaintiff B, and among the loans to the Plaintiff B, the amount of money borrowed from the Defendant-friendly party D was also included, and the Plaintiff B’s joint and several guarantee was also made for the obligation of the Plaintiff B.

C. On November 26, 2015, Plaintiff B embezzled KRW 24,548,00, which was deposited into the said business account, and also embezzled.