1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the evidence No. 1 as a whole, the Plaintiff and the co-defendant B of the first instance trial prepared a loan certificate stating that on April 4, 2006, KRW 95,00,000 borrowed from the Plaintiff to July 15, 2006, the Plaintiff and the co-defendant B of the first instance trial shall repay to the Plaintiff not later than July 15, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the “certificate of this case”). The fact that the name, resident registration number, and address of the Defendant and D are indicated in the joint guarantor column of the certificate of this case, and the seal affixed to the Defendant and D may be recognized

2. The party's assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is liable to pay the borrowed money to the plaintiff since he/she has jointly and severally guaranteed the debt of the borrowed money as stated in the certificate of this case.

As to this, the defendant's joint and several sureties of the deed of this case was prepared by the co-defendant D at will without the delegation of the defendant, so the defendant is not a joint and several sureties's loan obligation, but the deed of this case was prepared based on the will of the defendant in domestic affairs.

Even though the deed of this case did not have borrowed money from the plaintiff, the plaintiff Eul, the husband of the plaintiff, was falsely prepared for the purpose of showing it to the plaintiff, and therefore there is no loan obligation against the plaintiff.

B. In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in the testimony of the witness D of the trial party, D, with the consent of the defendant, can be recognized that D, with the consent of the defendant, entered the name, etc. of himself and the defendant in the column of joint and several sureties of the instant deed, and affixed the seal of the defendant in his name. According to the above facts, the instant deed was prepared according to the defendant

I would like to say.

In addition, in full view of the purport of the argument as to B of the first instance court, B borrowed funds necessary for the operation of a pharmacy from the Plaintiff, but was not repaid, and the amount borrowed from the Plaintiff is determined as KRW 95,00,000.