1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 30, 2010, the Plaintiff lent KRW 500,000,000 to C, the father of the Defendant, to the Defendant’s account.

B. The Plaintiff received the certificate of borrowing (No. 1) from the above C, and the recipient column of the above certificate of borrowing states that the name of the Defendant is several, and the Defendant’s seal imprint is affixed thereto, and under the indication of the recipient, the indication of “a joint and several surety” is added to the indication of the recipient.

(hereinafter “this case’s loan certificate”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.”

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff lent KRW 500,000 to C, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations against C according to the loan certificate in this case.

Therefore, as a joint and several surety, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff KRW 500,000,000 and damages for delay.

B. (1) If the stamp image of the holder of a title deed signed and sealed in the document is reproduced by his seal, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the stamp image shall be presumed to be based on the will of the holder of the title deed in which the document is prepared. Once the authenticity of the stamp image is presumed, the authenticity of the document shall be presumed pursuant to Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, if it is found that the act of affixing the stamp image was done by a person other than the holder of the title deed, the document presenter is liable to prove the fact that the act of affixing the stamp is based on the legitimate title delegated by the holder of the title deed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37831, Sept. 24, 2009). The stamp image, etc. is nothing more than one material that can recognize the right of representation, and therefore, it does not recognize the right of representation to conclude a joint and several surety contract on his/her behalf.