1. The loan amount of KRW 38,00,000 based on the loan certificate issued on April 16, 2013 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as of April 16, 2013 and the said amount.

Basic Facts

A. In the Plaintiff’s name, the loan certificate was drawn up as of April 16, 2013, stating that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 38,000,000 from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan”) at the maturity of payment on December 16, 2013 and at KRW 2.5% from the monthly interest.

B. The Plaintiff’s loan certificate of this case is written as joint and several sureties.

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 4-1-1, and the purport of the whole pleading as to the plaintiff's assertion of the parties to the loan of this case from the defendant, which is known to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's personal information is stated in the loan certificate of this case.

Around that time, the Plaintiff had issued a certificate of the Plaintiff’s personal seal impression to C for the transfer of the registration title of a motor vehicle, and C issued a certificate of the personal seal impression to the Defendant, and affixed the Plaintiff’s personal seal impression on the certificate

Therefore, the Plaintiff does not bear all obligations based on the loan certificate of this case.

The defendant's argument that C lends money to the defendant's argument and as security of the motor vehicle, the motor vehicle register, the plaintiff's certificate of personal seal impression and the certificate of personal seal impression are presented.

After confirming the Defendant’s direct telephone conversations with the Plaintiff, C prepared the instant loan certificate.

Therefore, the party borrowing the loan of this case is the plaintiff.

Judgment

In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of non-existence of a monetary obligation, if the plaintiff, who is the debtor, claims the first time to deny the fact that the cause of the debt occurred by specifying the claim, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of assertion and proof as to the facts

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259 delivered on March 13, 1998). Meanwhile, in a case where the stamp image affixed on a document is displayed by his/her own seal, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the stamp image is formed, i.e., the act of affixing a seal, barring any special circumstance.