2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Provided, That at the time of repayment, I will pay the interest on the principal at the rate of 5% per month.

on March 25, 2011: Defendant B ear

A. On March 25, 2011, the Defendant, on March 25, 201, drafted a document (Evidence No. 1, No. 1, No. 1, and 1, hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”) stating the following contents, to B.

B. The Plaintiff, a notary public, based on the executory exemplification of a notarial deed No. 4204, No. 4204, No. 201, issued by a notary public, filed an application for a seizure and collection order against B, and the Defendant as the garnishee. As to KRW 194,271,021, out of KRW 400,000,000,000,000 against B

(Seoul Central District Court 2013TTT 27864). On September 10, 2013, the above court rendered a ruling accepting the Plaintiff’s application (hereinafter “instant collection order”), and the above ruling was served on the Defendant on October 28, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant prepared the instant loan certificate on March 25, 201 and borrowed KRW 400,000 from B, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 194,271,021 out of the above loan amount to the Plaintiff according to the instant collection order.

B. The Defendant asserted that the Defendant had first drawn up the instant loan certificate before receiving the money from B, and that the Defendant could not lend the money due to the circumstances of B thereafter, and that the Defendant recovered the instant loan certificate from B.

Therefore, there is no obligation based on the loan certificate of this case against the defendant B.

3. Determination

A. Whether a loan obligation exists or not.