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. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 2015, D Co., Ltd. (the former trade name is E Co., Ltd.) loaned KRW 5,000,000 to C with a maturity of 34.9% per annum on May 29, 2019, and on the same day, a surety contract for the joint and several liability of the loan obligations under the Defendant’s name was prepared, and the said joint and several liability amount was limited to KRW 5,437,700 per annum.

B. On July 31, 2017, the Plaintiff received a loan claim against D Co., Ltd. from D Co., Ltd., and at that time notified C and the Defendant of the transfer of the above claim.

C. C’s loan obligations against the Plaintiff remain in KRW 6,465,381 as of April 2, 2018, including the principal amount of KRW 4,182,901, interest amount of KRW 2,282,480.

On the other hand, C was indicted on September 11, 2017 by means of fraud, such as forging and exercising a joint and several surety contract in the name of the defendant, fabrication of private documents, etc., and was convicted on September 11, 2017, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff is liable for joint and several liability for C’s loan obligations based on the legal doctrine on apparent representation under Article 126 of the Civil Act with respect to the Defendant.

On the other hand, an expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Act is established when a representative expresses or explicitly expresses his/her intention to act on behalf of himself/herself, or performs any act other than his/her authority with his/her own intention as an agent. In cases where a legal act is done under the name of himself/herself by deceiving himself/herself as if he/she was the principal by using his/her name without expressing such representation, a basic power of representation has been granted to a person who imitates the principal, and the other party has any justifiable reason to believe that the above mother was the exercise of his/her authority as the principal.