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.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) under Section 5 of the first instance court's decision No. 11, No. 4, the plaintiff's new argument in the first instance court shall be added to Section 5; and (b) Section 5 to Section 7 shall be deleted; and (c) Section 6. Conclusion shall be added to the same as the reasoning for the first instance court's decision; and (d) Section 420 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be cited as it is.

[Supplementary Parts]

5. Determination as to the assertion of representation by expression under Article 125 of the Civil Act

A. The plaintiff's assertion that D borrowed money from the plaintiff through the loan company of this case around January 2008, the defendant stated his name in the receipt (Evidence A 12) that D borrowed money from the plaintiff and indicated that D granted D the power of representation as a mark. Thus, the defendant bears the responsibility for the act of the bill of this case pursuant to Article 125 of the Civil Act.

B. If, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the signature affixed to the signature-keeping’s seal affixed to the signature-keeping’s seal affixed to the document of determination is actually presumed to have been made based on the will of the person who prepared the document, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the signature is presumed to have been made, and once the authenticity of the signature is presumed to have been made, the entire document is presumed to have been made pursuant to Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, if it is found that the act of affixing the seal was made by a person other than the person who prepared the document, the document presenter is liable to prove that the act

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da69686 delivered on April 8, 2003, etc.). However, as to the fact that the defendant's seal affixed on the defendant's name No. 12 (Receipt) was displayed by the defendant's seal, there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the defendant's seal affixed on the defendant's name was displayed by the defendant's seal, and barring any special circumstance, the seal is actually presumed to have been withdrawn by the defendant'