1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasons for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: “No. 1 (No dispute exists in the stamp image part of Defendant 1, 2, and 3’s stamp image part of the judgment of the court of first instance; Defendant 1, 2, and 3 are deemed to have established the entire document’s authenticity as a whole, since it is identical to the part on the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following portions written by the following specifications:

2. The portion of the document written after being sealed is presumed to be the authenticity of the entire document as there is no dispute over the loan certificate No. 1 and the Defendants’ seal image.

The defendants defenses that G forged the above loan certificate. Thus, the following circumstances acknowledged as a whole by adding up all the statements in Gap's 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11 as well as the testimony of Gap witness G at the trial, namely, Eul, a director of F, concluded a sales contract with the defendant C on August 7, 2008 to conduct the automobile transaction business on the 8 lots of land outside Busan Seo-gu I land, with the purchase price of KRW 40,000,000 for each of the above land as the purchase price of KRW 40,000,000, and the above purchaser's name as the representative director was changed to M& Co., Ltd. on August 25, 2008; ② F, on the date of the above sales contract, at the time of borrowing the down payment of KRW 4,00,000,000 for the above 20,0000,000 for the above 20,000.