1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. In fact, on November 18, 2010, the Solomon Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Savings Bank”) concluded an agreement to lend KRW 10 million to an applicant for a loan under the Plaintiff’s name, and wired KRW 10 million to the passbook in the name of the Plaintiff on the same day.

On January 21, 2012, the Solomon Savings Bank filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, and the decision of performance recommendation was finalized on January 21, 2012 that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 9,007,261 and delay damages to the Solomon Savings Bank.

(Seoul Central District Court 201Gaso2454765, the next "the decision on the execution recommendation of this case") The Solomon Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on April 30, 2013, and the defendant was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 4 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that the cause of the claim occurred, but only the Plaintiff was asked to receive the difference from argue, and the Plaintiff was asked to send three copies of the certificate of the personal seal impression to B by requesting the delivery in the name of argue.

B purchased Eubs vehicles with the Plaintiff’s certificate of personal seal impression, and received the automobile security loan amounting to KRW 10 million from the Solomon Savings Bank in the Plaintiff’s name.

The Plaintiff’s right of representation for the purchase of a motor vehicle to B, and there is no authority to conclude a loan contract. Therefore, the instant loan contract is null and void by an unauthorized representation.

In making a loan contract as a specialized financial company, the defendant has a high-level duty to investigate the power of representation in the loan application form, and neglected such procedures and allowed the borrowing of loan to a female female B in the name of the plaintiff who is a male, and therefore, the expression agent is not constituted.

Compulsory execution based on the decision on the execution recommendation of this case shall be rejected.

3. The plaintiff had the power of representation for the purchase of a motor vehicle to B (the fact that there is no dispute) and the plaintiff and B.