beta
Text
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.
Reasons
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff’s argument in the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, this is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that, even if the Defendant did not borrow money from the Plaintiff and did not grant the right to borrow money to B, the Plaintiff lent the instant money to B for the purpose of the Defendant’s housing-related expenses, and the Defendant said that, on June 15, 2014, when the Plaintiff had found at the Defendant’s work place and demanded the repayment of the debt, the Defendant said that “the payment of the debt would be early,” the Defendant ratified the act of non-authorized representation of B.
In light of the above, ratification of invalidation or unauthorized representation is a single act with knowledge of invalidation, etc. to vest the effect of such act in his/her own, and it is not required to establish a certain method as to the method of expressing his/her intent. However, in order to recognize implied ratification, there is a reason to deem that the person himself/herself has fully understood the legal status faced by such act and that the result of such act belongs to himself/herself (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Da37831, Sept. 24, 2009; 2010Da8319, 83205, Feb. 10, 201). The circumstance asserted by the plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant ratified the act of non-exclusive representation under a monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.