The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As long as the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, the court shall reasonably interpret the objective meaning given by the parties to the act of display in writing, regardless of the party’s internal intent, and in this case, if the objective meaning of the text is clear, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the declaration of intent in accordance with the language stated in the disposal document, unless there is any counter-proof as clear and acceptable to deny the contents.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Da60065, May 27, 2005; Supreme Court Decision 2012Da4471, Nov. 29, 2012). In cases where the interpretation of the intent of a party expressed in a disposition document is at issue, it shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logical and empirical rules by comprehensively taking into account the content of the language and text, the motive and background leading up to the agreement, the purpose to be achieved by the agreement, the parties’ genuine intent, etc.

(2) The term “loan for consumption” means a loan for consumption between the parties to a loan for consumption, in a case where the parties are liable to provide money, or any other substitutes, not by a loan for consumption. On the other hand, in a case where a loan for consumption is liable to provide the said money, etc. as well as by a loan for consumption, the validity of a loan for consumption takes place between the parties to a loan for consumption, which provides that the parties to an existing obligation shall agree that the subject matter of a loan for consumption shall be the subject matter of a loan for consumption. As such, a

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da2846 delivered on December 6, 2002). (See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da2846 delivered on December 6, 2002) Review of the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence and the record reveals the following facts.

C On February 7, 2007, in the procedure of the auction of D's real estate in the Jeonan District Court D's Jeju District Court, the land and the ground buildings (one name F), G land and the ground buildings (one name Helel) in Jinan-gun, Jinan-gun (hereinafter "each real estate of this case").