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. The reasons for the court's explanation by the court of first instance are as follows: each "Defendant C" of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as "C"; each "Defendant B" is as "Defendant"; each "Defendant B" is as "Defendant and C"; each "Defendant" is as "Defendant and C"; the fourth to fifth to fifth to third as stated in paragraph (2) are as follows. On the other hand, even if the evidence submitted by the defendant at the trial is added, the second agreement of this case is insufficient to regard it as an unfair juristic act, anti-social order, declaration of intention by mistake, declaration of intention by mistake, and a juristic act violating the principle of good faith as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for addition of the evidence submitted by the defendant at the trial, the second agreement of this case is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. The portion Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 (hereinafter "the agreement of this case") written in order to state that "the defendant shall request the termination of provisional seizure of this case on the condition that he shall reimburse 163,927,030 won to the plaintiff at the rate of 20% per annum from the Daejeon District Court 2010Kahap470 on the provisional seizure of real estate from July 16, 2007. If the agreement of this case is not implemented until the above commitment date, it is confirmed that it is jointly liable for all the costs incurred jointly with C, a joint guarantor who is a joint guarantor." Since the defendant denies the authenticity of the agreement of this case, the defendant first denies the authenticity of the agreement, and according to the results of the written appraisal by appraiser I of the first instance trial, it is recognized that the defendant's signature on the one's name side of the defendant's signature is a signature of the defendant, so the agreement of this case shall be presumed to be duly formed against the defendant, and no other evidence may be reversed.

Therefore, since the above evidence Nos. 4-1 is deemed to have been prepared by the defendant's intention, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 163,927,030 and the above amount from July 16, 2007.