1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On October 12, 2011, Plaintiff A (the deceased on January 25, 201, 201, hereinafter “the deceased”), the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the deceased on December 20, 201 without any agreement to pay interest, and did not pay the said money until now.

Therefore, the defendant should pay the plaintiff as the inheritor of the deceased the above loan amounting to KRW 10 million and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant did not borrow KRW 10 million from the Deceased and did not have prepared the loan certificate of this case. Thus, the Defendant did not have the obligation to repay the above loan, etc. to the Plaintiff.

2. On October 12, 201, the loan certificate of this case stated that the Defendant borrowed a total of KRW 10 million from the Deceased on October 12, 201, and the Defendant affixed a seal on the Defendant’s name next to the Defendant’s name at the bottom. However, the Defendant stated that the Defendant’s seal affixed on the loan certificate of this case on the first date for pleading of the court was not based on the Defendant’s seal.

As above, the Defendant denies the authenticity of the seal imprint itself, and there is no evidence to deem that the seal affixed to the seal imprint in this case was printed out by the Defendant’s seal, and thus, it cannot be deemed as evidence to use the seal imprint as evidence.

As a result, the Plaintiff’s assertion is not acceptable inasmuch as there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the Deceased.

3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is reasonable.

The judgment of the first instance, which differs from this conclusion, is unfair, so the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.