1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of this court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, other than using “Defendant B” as “B,” and “A” of the fifth 19 as “K,” respectively, is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts the main argument (1) that the contract of this case was prepared by B, who is an employee of the defendant corporation, and the contract of this case was effective against the defendant corporation. Thus, the defendant corporation is jointly and severally obligated with B to refund KRW 500,000,000 to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 6 of the contract of this case.

(2) The judgment of the court below is reasonable in recognizing the authenticity of a disposal document, taking into account the fact that the authenticity of a disposal document is recognized, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the document would be denied if the authenticity is recognized. Even if it is a disposal document, if it is proven that it is forged and the authenticity is not recognized, the existence and content of the declaration of intent according to the content of the document cannot be recognized.

(2) In the case of this case, it is difficult to recognize that the contract form of this case was duly formed as a disposal document on the grounds that the contract form of this case was forged and falsified. The contract form of this case was written by the parties to the contract form of this case and the Defendant Corporation, and its seal is not affixed on the side on which K’s personal information is written, and that B forged the contract form of this case.

Therefore, the existence and content of the declaration of intent pursuant to the content of the instant contract cannot be acknowledged based on the content of the contract.

(B) As to this, the Plaintiff’s act of signing and sealing the official seal of Defendant Corporation among the instant trade reservation form as an employee of Defendant Corporation.