beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance was modified and used as follows. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
【Supplementary Use】
3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion
A. The Defendant asserts that the content of each of the above certificates (hereinafter “each of the certificates of this case”) was in blank at the time he puts his signature and seal on the Gap evidence Nos. 5 (Certificate) and Gap evidence Nos. 6-2 (Certificate). The Defendant asserts that the contents of each of the certificates of this case (hereinafter “each of the certificates of this case”) shall not be admitted as evidence since the Plaintiff et al. supplemented without authority to do so
A private document is presumed to be authentic when the signature, seal, or seal of the person or his/her agent is affixed (Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act). In cases where it is acknowledged that the person who prepared the private document voluntarily affixed his/her signature, seal, or seal on the private document, the authenticity of the entire document shall be presumed to have been established unless there are other special circumstances, such as the reversal of the presumption by counter-proof, etc., in cases where the establishment of the portion of the stamp image, etc. is recognized. If the authenticity of the stamp image, etc. is recognized, the document shall be presumed to have signed and sealed by the person who signed the document under the condition that the entire document is completed, and the document shall be deemed to have been signed and sealed by the person who signed the document at the time when the whole or part of the document was completed, unless there are other special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da11406, Apr. 11, 2003).