1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. The following facts, including the confirmation of the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent in records:

On April 26, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) lent KRW 32 million to the Defendant; and (b) filed a lawsuit claiming a loan with the Daegu District Court Decision 2014Da125739, supra, by asserting that there was a loan certificate (No. 2; hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) written on the same day as evidence on the same day.

In this regard, the defendant did not borrow 32 million won from the plaintiff, and argued that the loan certificate in this case was forged by the plaintiff.

On August 12, 2015, the above court was subject to criminal punishment for forging the loan certificate under the name of the defendant (the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on January 19, 201, while the plaintiff appealed with the same court No. 2011No479, Jan. 19, 201). The judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on the Supreme Court Decision 201Do4062.

(2) On October 10, 2013, the Daegu District Court Decision 2012 Godan1109 decided Oct. 10, 2013 (the Plaintiff appealedd with Daegu District Court 2013No3381, and the Plaintiff’s assertion of mistake was reversed on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the Plaintiff’s allegation of mistake was reversed on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the appeal by Supreme Court Decision 2014Do394

[) In light of the contents and preparation time of the loan certificate of this case, the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that it is difficult to believe the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as the loan certificate of this case, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’

B. As to this, the Plaintiff appealed by Daegu District Court 2015Na305960, but on December 17, 2015, the judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal was rendered (hereinafter “the judgment subject to review”) and the Plaintiff appealed with Supreme Court Decision 2016Da203681 regarding the judgment subject to review, but the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on May 12, 2016.

C. The Plaintiff, under the name of the Defendant, has forged the instant loan certificate and submitted the said loan claim lawsuit to the court, thereby deceiving the court, and KRW 32 million.