1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, as the representative director of F, Co., Ltd., the contractor of the E apartment newly constructed in Seosan City, introduced H the representative director of G, the above apartment executor, to the Defendant, I living together with the Defendant, and J.

On January 28, 2012, Defendant 50,000,000 Won for the temporary lessee’s payment method, and Defendant 3,000,000 Won for the loans to Defendant 5,01, 801,801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 801, 8010, 8010, 26, 2007, 707, 707, 102, 102, 100,000 won for an apartment and 10,000,00 won for the loans to Defendant 5,01, 801, 8010, 26, 2012.

B. After that, the Plaintiff entered at the bottom of the 30 million won fake agreement (a letter of agreement on the loans mentioned in No. 1 of the above table, and evidence No. 27-1 of the evidence No. 27) entered into between the Defendant and H, and affixed the Plaintiff’s seal on the name side of the name.

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff introduced N to sell N’s land and above ground buildings owned by N to the Defendant in the Dong-gu, Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, N, and the Defendant purchased the above land and above ground buildings for KRW 400 million from N on May 16, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the above land and above ground buildings under the name of P, his/her father’s ancillary, P on May 29, 2013, and in the process, the Plaintiff was above the Defendant.

In order to repay the sum of KRW 30 million and interest thereon as stated in paragraph (1), N was treated as having paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff instead of receiving KRW 50 million from the Defendant through the Defendant and N, instead of receiving KRW 400 million from the Defendant. D.

After that, the defendant and I lent to the above H.