1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

Judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of apparent liability against the Defendant under paragraph (2) below. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion of liability for expression against the Defendant, even if Gap’s certificate No. 4-3 and 4 (each of the Promissory Notes in this case, hereinafter “each of the Promissory Notes”) were forged, the Plaintiff’s assertion that each of the Promissory Notes in this case was traded for a long time by K (L) and the Defendant, the issuer, and was normally traded at the time of receiving each of the Promissory Notes in this case. Promissory Notes in the name of the Defendant, which was forged in the number of pages, were distributed for more than one year, and that the Promissory Notes in the name of the Defendant was distributed for more than one year, and that the Plaintiff was investigated and confirmed with the Defendant’s employees by telephone with the Defendant’s company and sent the Promissory Notes to the Defendant’s employees by facsimile and by facsimile of the Defendant’s company. Thus, the Plaintiff did not know or know that each of the Promissory Notes in this case was forged, the Defendant’s assertion that each of the Promissory Notes in this case ought to be paid to the Plaintiff in accordance with the legal principles of express liability under the Commercial Act and the Commercial Act.

The defendant may not be deemed to have provided any appearance that can be held responsible for the forgery of L.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

3...