The burden of proving that a document that is recognized as a document affixed with a seal affixed in an administrative litigation is made out of the seal affixed to the person under whose name the document is written is deprived of the freedom of decision-making by coercion (=the principal person)

In administrative litigation, in case where it is recognized that the seal affixed to the document is the seal affixed to the document affixed to it by the name of the person in whose name the document is prepared, unless there are special circumstances, the establishment of the seal affixed is presumed to have been genuine based on the will of the person in whose name the document is prepared, and once the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established, so the document shall be proved by the person who asserts that the document has been made in a state where the degree of

Article 329 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

Lee Sung-sung et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu10755 delivered on June 28, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the burden of proof, such as the theory of lawsuit, in recognizing the fact that Nonparty 1, the Plaintiff’s mother, by macroficial evidence, donated funds insufficient to acquire the instant real estate to the Plaintiff. The argument is without merit.

2. Where it is recognized that the seal affixed to the document is a seal affixed to the seal affixed to the name of the person who prepared the document, unless there are special circumstances, the establishment of the seal affixed to the document is presumed to have been genuine by the will of the person who prepared the document, i.e., the act of sealing the document, and once the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established, the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established. Thus, in this case, unless it is recognized that the seal affixed to the document under the name of the person who affixed the document No. 1 (written confirmation) is a seal affixed to the document, the establishment of the seal affixed to the document and the authenticity of the entire document shall be presumed to have been presumed to have been completed by the person who asserts that the document was made in a state where the degree of coercion is extremely severe and completely deprived of the freedom of decision-making of the person who made the document, and the court below rejected the above document in light of the testimony of the person who affixed the document to the plaintiff that it was made invalid without knowledge.

According to the records, the above dispositions of the court below are just and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles or incomplete hearing. There is no reason to argue.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)