1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. On January 5, 2011, the Defendant stated, “A”, “A”, “H of Gyeonggi-do, the delegating address column, “A”, “A”, “A” in the delegating address column, “A” in the delegating address column, “A” in the delegating address column, “A” in the delegating address column, “A” in the delegating name column, and “G” in the delegating name column.

The defendant written on the letter of delegation that "I Apartment-gun 1 and 201", "F (Defendant)", "F (Defendant), G", and "F (Defendant), and "F (Defendant)," in the name column of the mandatary in the name of the mandatary in Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do, and "F (Defendant), G, and the date for payment," and written A's proxy form (hereinafter referred to as "the letter of delegation in this case") by affixing A's seal attached to A's name in the name column of the mandator.

B. The Defendant’s foregoing on January 5, 201

On February 16, 2011, a notary public, who is aware of the fact, entrusted a law firm Macheon-do Attorney to prepare a notarial deed of this case with the same contents of a promissory note (hereinafter referred to as “instant promissory note”) in the same manner as the stated in the subsection, and, if A delays the payment of the amount of a promissory note, a notary public, despite being immediately subject to compulsory execution, made a notarial deed to the effect that no objection is raised (hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed of this case”).

C. The Defendant: (a) forged the instant delegation and promissory note; (b) attempted to obtain KRW 19,025,300 from A to obtain a seizure and collection order regarding A’s right to claim the money deposited in relation to land compensation from the Republic of Korea by using the instant authentic deed; (c) but was attempted by A to bring the instant lawsuit on the wind.

‘The District Court 2016 Ma3630, 2016 Ma4871, etc.' due to suspicion, etc.