1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 6th to 17th page of the judgment of the court of first instance) is the same with the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 2th to 3th page 17th page of the judgment of the court of first instance

The third 17th 17th am the following.

It argues to the effect that the Defendant forged the Plaintiff’s seal impression without the involvement of H, which is the representative director of the Plaintiff, on the grounds that there is no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 7, and Gap’s evidence No. 8 (a corporeal movables transfer and takeover contract, and the Plaintiff’s seal in the above contract.

However, the Plaintiff concluded the above contract with F in the instant complaint and the application form for modification of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim on May 3, 2019, and recognized the authenticity of the above contract with H affixed the Plaintiff’s seal impression in the above contract. Although the confession as to the formation of the document is a confession as to the facts supporting the document, the confession as to the cancellation of the document should be treated equally as the withdrawal of the confession as to the facts supporting the other facts, unlike the withdrawal of the confession as to the facts supporting the document, and thus, the party who recognized the authenticity of the document cannot freely withdraw it without the consent of the other party, and the same applies in a case where the Plaintiff acknowledged

(1) Each of the evidence No. 11 and No. 12 of the Plaintiff’s confessions are effective only when the confessions are contrary to the truth and due to mistake (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da5654, Apr. 24, 2001). In this case, the Plaintiff’s confessions are valid only when the confessions are made contrary to the truth and due to mistake (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da47860, Feb. 22, 2000).

In addition, under the above contract, the name of the representative director of the plaintiff is followed.