beta
Text
1. Defendant B, jointly and severally with Nonparty D, as to KRW 110,000,00 and KRW 80,000 among them, shall be jointly and severally with Nonparty D, and as to May 2, 2005.
Reasons
1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;
(b) Judgment by service based on which recognition is applicable (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C
A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was to borrow Cost Construction Cost Construction Co., Ltd. from the Plaintiff; ① on April 26, 2005, ② on May 2, 2005, ② on May 80, 2005, and ② Defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation of Cost Construction Cost Construction Co., Ltd. to the Plaintiff on each of the above dates.
Therefore, Defendant C is obligated to pay KRW 100,000,000 to the Plaintiff.
B. If the stamp image of a holder of a title deed affixed on a private document is reproduced by his/her seal, barring special circumstances, it shall be presumed that the authenticity of the stamp image is created, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the holder of the title deed, and once the authenticity of the stamp image is presumed, the authenticity of the document shall be presumed pursuant to Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. Such presumption is broken if it is revealed that the act of affixing the stamp image was made by the person other than the title deed, or that it was made against the will of the holder of the title deed, or not based on the will of the holder of the title deed. Furthermore, the presumption that the act of affixing the stamp image is based on the will of the holder of the title deed, is de facto presumed. Thus, if the person disputing the authenticity of the stamp image proves circumstances that the act of affixing the stamp image is based on the will of the holder of the title deed, then the presumption of the authenticity of its authenticity shall be broken.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da38049 Decided April 29, 2010). In this regard, there is no dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C that the stamp image affixed after the name of each Defendant C, which is included in the document No. 1-2 and the document No. 1-2, is based on the seal of each Defendant C, but the above part of the name of the Defendant C is based on each of the above documents.