1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A lawsuit for confirmation of the authenticity of a deed is about whether the document solely proves the rights or legal relations has been prepared by the person under whose title it was prepared.

The Plaintiff asserted that the instant deed was not prepared by the Plaintiff, and filed the instant lawsuit.

However, the plaintiff stated that the name and resident registration number of the plaintiff on the deed of this case is the plaintiff's own penology, and the plaintiff's assertion is therefore without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair by rejecting the lawsuit of this case differently, but the court of first instance is difficult to find that the confirmation of the authenticity of the deed of this case with respect to the deed of this case does not have sufficient help to resolve the dispute itself or to resolve the dispute, and it is also sought confirmation that the contents of the deed of this case are not true. Thus, the court of first instance determined that there is no benefit in confirmation

However, as the instant deed is a loan deposit certificate against the Defendant of C, the Plaintiff signed and sealed as a guarantor for the loan deposit obligation against the Defendant of C, so the authenticity of the instant deed would be at least a great help in resolving legal relations as to the existence or absence of the Plaintiff’s guarantee obligation against the Defendant. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there is no benefit in verifying the instant lawsuit, and thus, it is inappropriate to determine the first instance court.

The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case has interest in confirmation.

In this case where only the plaintiff appealed, the court of first instance cannot render a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim because it was disadvantageous to the plaintiff who is the appellant under the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration. Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.