1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons stated in this part are as follows: (a) the reasoning for this Court’s explanation is the same as that for “1. Basic Facts” not exceeding the second interruption of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary or added parts] Part 9 of the third party judgment of the first instance court " September 26, 201" shall be written " September 27, 2011" and " September 29, 2011" of the first instance judgment " September 30, 201" respectively.

Defendant C shall be put into “Defendant C” at the last place of the judgment of the first instance court.

The fourth 8 to 10th 10th 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as the "relevant criminal case") shall be brought in the following cases:

The foregoing judgment was sentenced to the dismissal on December 15, 2015 from the appellate court (Seoul District Court 2015No1608) to December 15, 2015, and became final and conclusive as it was on December 23, 2015 (hereinafter “relevant criminal case”). The foregoing judgment added “this Court’s obvious fact” to the fourth lower court’s explanation of evidence at the fourth bottom of the judgment of the first instance.

2. The content of the reference document submitted by the Plaintiff on May 4, 2016, after the closing of argument in the trial, shall also be examined to the extent that it supplements existing arguments.

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) E forged each of the instant loans in F’s name without paying it to the Plaintiff, the creditor, and then delivered it to the Defendants, thereby causing the Defendants to perform the procedure for cancellation registration of the instant mortgage registration, etc. securing each of the instant loans. Meanwhile, in accepting the above procedure for cancellation registration, the Defendants violated Article 25 of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act, which provides for “the duty of confirmation of the delegating person, etc.,” and committed a normal delegation from the Plaintiff or the registered titleholder.