The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's additional claim in the trial are all dismissed.

costs of lawsuit after an appeal are filed.

1. The court's explanation of this case is identical to the statement of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following parts used or added. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary or supplementary parts] Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be added to "Fdong" in Part 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

From 2th to 16th of the judgment of the first instance, the twoth to 16th of the judgment shall be followed as follows.

Gohap) In 4306(Joint) the Defendant was sentenced to a 8-month conviction of imprisonment, and the Defendant appealed to the said judgment, and the Daejeon District Court (2014No2274, 2015No854) rendered a judgment of conviction, and the Defendant was sentenced to a 3-year conviction of imprisonment with prison labor as it is found guilty, in addition to the fact that the Defendant was found not guilty of fraud with respect to the Victim H in the Daejeon District Court (2014No274, 2015No854). Although the Defendant appealed to the said judgment, the appeal was dismissed by the

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 4, 8, and 9 (including branch numbers), the whole purport of the pleadings, and Nos. 3 and 7 of the judgment of the first instance court as follows.

Since the defendant's deposit account is returned to D, or it is easy to commit a tort in D by lending the defendant's deposit account to D, it is necessary to compensate for the damages equivalent to the deposit money as joint tortfeasor.

Nos. 12 and 13 of the judgment of the first instance shall be followed as follows.

In conclusion, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant obtained the power of representation for the conclusion of the instant lease contract from the defendant or the defendant ratified the said contract.

Therefore, since the above contract cannot be viewed as effective to the defendant, the plaintiff's above assertion based on this premise is without merit.

From 3th to 17th of the judgment of the first instance court, the following shall be followed.

In addition, only the evidence submitted by the plaintiff is the name of the defendant D.