1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the first instance court's reasoning is to change the first instance court's ruling No. 5, second instance court's ruling No. 7, second instance court's ruling No. 16, and second instance's "Singman on Oct. 1, 2016" and second instance's "Singman on Oct. 1, 2006" into "Singman on Oct. 1, 206," and (b) the first instance court's ruling No. 9 to "Singman on Oct. 1, 206"; and (c) except for the defendant's argument

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion No. 3 (hereinafter “instant performance memorandum”) was written by I, as the Defendant’s statement, regardless of the Defendant’s will, as well as the Defendant’s statement No. 12 (a written agreement, hereinafter “instant written agreement”) to invalidate the instant performance memorandum, and thus, the instant performance angle has no effect.

B. (1) The authenticity of the entire document is presumed, unless there are special circumstances, to the effect that the authenticity of the seal is formed, i.e., the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the person under whose name the document is written, and once the authenticity of the seal is presumed to have been established, the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established.

However, the above presumption is broken if it is revealed that the act of affixing the seal was done by a person other than the person under whose name the document was prepared, so the person under whose name the document was affixed is responsible to prove that the act of affixing the seal was made by a legitimate title delegated by the person under

(2) As to the assertion that I prepared a written performance of this case regardless of the defendant's will, regardless of the defendant's intention, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the defendant's seal affixed to the written performance of this case is based on the seal of the defendant, and thus, the authenticity of the written performance of this case is established as a whole.