1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On November 26, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff leased KRW 208,000,000 to C and the Defendant as of June 30, 2014.

At the time of the above monetary loan loan, the Defendant and C agreed to the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff “if any damage was incurred, such as the Plaintiff’s loss of ownership of an apartment house (Seoul Songpa-gu D apartment 302 Dong 1302, Dong 1302) offered as a security to the financial institution by delaying the repayment of the above loan, the Defendant and C agreed to compensate separately, and that “the Plaintiff shall bear the interest that

However, as the Defendant and C delayed the repayment of the borrowed amount, the Plaintiff sold the above apartment at the time to lower the interest claim amounting to KRW 800,000,000,000, which is much less than the market price of KRW 730,000,000, thereby incurring damages equivalent to KRW 70,000, which is the difference.

The total amount of interest paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant and the financial institution instead of C is KRW 24,823,279.

Therefore, according to the above agreement, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the interest amounting to KRW 302,823,279 (=208,000,000 for the damages of KRW 70,000 for the damages of KRW 24,823,279) and the damages for delay.

2. If, barring any special circumstance, the authenticity of the signature affixed to the name holder on the document of determination is produced by his/her seal, barring any special circumstance, it shall be presumed that the act of affixing the seal is based on the will of the name holder on the document. Once the authenticity of the seal is presumed, the authenticity of the entire document shall be presumed to have been created.

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

(Supreme Court Decision 2009Da37831 Decided September 24, 2009, etc.). According to the results of fact-finding and the purport of the entire pleadings with respect to E head of this court, A.