1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

With respect to this case, this court's reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, this court cites it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The list of pages 16 through 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be as follows.

“2) After the Plaintiff’s special representative, as the Plaintiff’s wife, filed several lawsuits as indicated in the table “case Number” column as indicated below (hereinafter “related litigation”) by asserting that each disposition document on which the Plaintiff’s seal of the instant tree lawsuit was affixed, and subsequent to the occurrence of the Plaintiff’s brain transfusion, the Plaintiff’s special representative filed several proposals (hereinafter “related litigation”). The judgment on whether to recognize the forgery of the relevant litigation is as follows.

The Seoul Eastern District Court 2016Na2067210 [1] The Seoul Eastern District Court 2016Na2067210 [20 million won: Seoul East Eastern District Court 2014Gahap103891] The case’s summary lawsuit seal is not recognized as a forgery of the case’s summary lawsuit, and the case’s summary lawsuit seal is recognized as being actually used by the Plaintiff, and the case’s summary lawsuit seal is rejected on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to recognize that the Plaintiff’s seal on the relevant mortgage contract’s document was affixed against the Plaintiff’s will. The Supreme Court’s trial decision is dismissed and final and conclusive. The one bank contract document (the maximum claim amount of KRW 9.75 billion) on February 21, 2012, the one bank contract document (the maximum claim amount of KRW 8.280 million) on September 28, 2012, the Seoul High Court 2016Da328145 decided May 201, 2016