1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On March 22, 2015, D, which had been a de facto manager C (around January 2016, 2016, operated C and gave up management) prepared and issued a loan certificate stating C, the borrower, the Defendant, the joint and several surety, C, the loan amount of KRW 80 million, and the repayment date as of September 22, 2015 (hereinafter “the first loan certificate of this case”).

Around that time, the Plaintiff remitted the amount of KRW 76 million to C’s corporate account (the amount calculated by deducting KRW 4 million as interest from KRW 80 million).

B. The plaintiff is the above A.

Between D and D on April 30, 2015, with respect to the money received as described in the subsection, the loan certificate entered as of October 31, 2015 (hereinafter “the second loan certificate of this case”) entered as of April 31, 2015, as the creditor, debtor C, joint and several sureties D, loan amounting to KRW 80,000,000,000 and the due date.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On March 22, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that: (a) lent KRW 76 million to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) on September 22, 2015; (b) on September 22, 2015, at the rate of 5% per month interest; and (c) D jointly and severally guaranteed.

The first loan certificate of this case prepared at the time of the above loan is written by the defendant as the principal debtor, which means that the defendant is jointly and severally liable by the defendant. At the time, the defendant is obligated to grant the right of representation to D for the above joint and several liability or pay the above loan debt to the plaintiff according to the apparent representation liability or the name holder liability under Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

On October 23, 2017, the Plaintiff finally arranged the cause of the claim.

Judgment

The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone, as alleged by the Plaintiff, D, when preparing the first loan certificate of this case, was granted the right of representation by the Defendant on this issue.

It is not enough to recognize the fact that the defendant has the power of representation, which is the basis of expression representation against the defendant.