1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 13, 201, the Defendant’s father, Co-Defendant C, who borrowed money from the Plaintiff on April 13, 201, prepared a loan certificate (No. 1; hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) written on April 13, 201, stating the Defendant’s name and resident registration number, and address, and affixed the Defendant’s seal impression on the name of the Defendant.

B. On April 20, 201, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “registration of creation of a neighboring mortgage of this case”) with respect to the size of 3,306 square meters of D forest land and 1,743 square meters of miscellaneous land in Yong-gun, Nam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City owned by the Defendant on April 20, 201.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. If the authenticity of the seal imprinted on the private document to determine the cause of the claim is reproduced by his/her seal, barring special circumstances, it is presumed that the act of affixing the seal will be based on the will of the person who prepared the document. On the other hand, when the authenticity of the seal is presumed, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed pursuant to Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, the presumption that the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person who prepared the document is de facto presumed. As such, the presumption of the authenticity of the seal imprints is broken off if the person who contests the authenticity of the seal imprints the court proves that the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person who prepared the document by counter-written the seal imprints.

(2) In light of the fact that the content of the document should be denied, unless there is any clear and acceptable evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of the document, the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the content of the document should be recognized.