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 reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the court of first instance except for the following “the second higher portion”, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

[Judgment of the court of first instance on the ground that the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance included the evidence Nos. 9, 10, and 11 submitted by the defendant in this Court (including the number of serial numbers) and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are legitimate, even if the evidence No. 9, 10, and 11 submitted by the defendant in this Court were examined as follows.

2) We examine whether there was a legal act between the deceased and the defendant to establish the secured debt of the right to collateral security in this case.

A) As shown in the Defendant’s assertion, a written confirmation of payment (No. 9, hereinafter “instant payment confirmation”) that seems consistent with the Defendant’s assertion.

Since the plaintiff denies the authenticity of this case, it is examined as to the authenticity of the written confirmation of payment in this case.

A witness L of the political party who works as the secretary of the K office of a certified judicial scrivener and was in charge of the application for the registration of the establishment of each of the instant units of the establishment of a mortgage in the instant case is recognized as the testimony to the effect that “the deceased and the Defendant prepared a mortgage contract and a written confirmation of payment in accordance with the terms and conditions agreed between the deceased and the Defendant, and received a seal from the deceased on

However, L is relatively detailed in light of the fact that L is in a conversation with the deceased and the defendant who had been in the daily work for three years prior to his day, and the fact that L is in a relatively detailed statement, etc. that is seen in the Section 21 below, it is difficult to believe L’s testimony as it is, and the statement in Section 10 No. 10-4 alone is insufficient to recognize that the stamp image of the deceased’s name affixed on the certificate of payment in this case is based on the seal of the deceased, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this differently. Even if it is based on the seal of the deceased, the above facts and the evidence as seen earlier,