1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) On December 7, 2011, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 30 million to the Defendant on December 7, 2012, the due date for payment of the said money to the Defendant. 2) The Defendant is not a “Defendant” but a “stock company C (hereinafter “C”) with the representative director” or “D” with the Defendant’s birth.

B. Determination 1) Generally, who is a party to a contract constitutes a matter of interpretation of the intent of the party involved in the contract. The interpretation of an expression of intent clearly establishes the objective meaning that the party has given to the act of expressing the intent. In a case where the parties to a contract written out in writing as a disposal document, the objective meaning that the parties gave to the act of expressing the intent should be reasonably interpreted according to the contents written in the document, regardless of the party’s internal intent, although it is not bound to be written. In this case, unless there are special circumstances where the objective meaning of the text is clear, barring special circumstances, the existence and content of the expression of intent should be recognized (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da81957, Jan. 27, 201). According to the respective statements and arguments stated in subparagraphs 1, 2, and 3, and the entire purport of pleading and pleading, the Defendant is deemed to have written to the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 30 million, maturity of payment, and the Plaintiff’s name and seal stated “Defendant 1” as “the Plaintiff’s name and seal”).

3) Comprehensively taking account of the facts described in the foregoing paragraph 2, the Plaintiff.