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

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

A. On February 14, 2014, C and the defendant, a notary public, who had the representative director of the plaintiff, borrowed KRW 300 million from the defendant with interest rate of KRW 39 million per annum, and paid the plaintiff with interest rate of KRW 300 million per annum from March 14, 2014 to February 14, 2015, and C and D jointly and severally guaranteed the plaintiff's obligations, and in the case of the plaintiff and the joint guarantor's failure to repay the above obligations, a notary public, who prepared the "notarial deed for monetary loan" as stipulated in Article 106 of the No. 201 of the No. 106 of the No. 2014.

(hereinafter) The above monetary loan contract between the plaintiff and the defendant is "the monetary loan contract of this case" and the above notarial deed is "the notarial deed of this case". B

The defendant paid KRW 300 million to C on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, testimony of witness C of the first instance trial, purport of whole pleadings

2. Although C, the representative director of the Plaintiff’s assertion, was the lending of KRW 300 million from the Defendant to repay his/her personal debt, C, without the resolution of the board of directors, concluded the instant monetary loan agreement with the Plaintiff as the obligor by abusing his/her power of representation without the resolution of the Plaintiff’s

The defendant was well aware that the monetary loan contract of this case was made without the resolution of the board of directors, and constitutes abuse of power of representation.

Therefore, the monetary loan contract of this case is not effective against the plaintiff, and compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case against the plaintiff should be denied.

3. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. As to the non-existence of the resolution of the board of directors, the evidence mentioned above 1), Gap evidence No. 2, Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

In full view of the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial, the Plaintiff was subject to a resolution of the board of directors when borrowing funds from financial institutions, etc., and the instant case.