The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Fact-finding and judgment of the court below

A. As to the assertion of evidence, the lower court determined that the authenticity of each of the above documents is presumed to have been established on the ground that (1) evidence Nos. 2-1, 2 (Receipt), and 3-1 (Identification of Evidence Nos. 3) is recognized as being based on D’s seal, in full view of the overall purport of the arguments as a result of the first instance appraiser C’s stamp image and written appraisal by the first instance appraiser C, since all of the seals affixed after the name of the holder of each of the above documents is recognized as being based on D’s seal, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff forged the above documents with D’s seal impression.

(2) As to the establishment of the authenticity of the evidence No. 1 (a sales contract), the court below affirmed the following facts: (a) comprehensively considering the statement No. 3-1 of the evidence No. 3, the seal No. 3 of the first instance trial appraiser C of the first instance trial, and the result of the appraisal of the seal No. 1 of the court below's appraisal of the copy of the evidence No. 1 of the above sales contract, the seal No. 4 of the network D name, which is the seller of the above sales contract, is based on D's seal; (b) the following seal of the defendant's name, which is the buyer, is based on the seal of the defendant; and (c) the above sales contract contains the E's name, which is recognized as the seal of the witness E; and (d) notwithstanding its title, the above sales contract between the plaintiff and the defendant and the real estate exchange contract between the defendant and each of the land of this case, the plaintiff and the defendant acquired each of the above land of this case on behalf of the defendant; and (d) based on the above facts found that the plaintiff forged of the above sales contract.

B. The lower court’s findings based on the above evidence reveals the contents of each of the above documents.