청구이의
1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff, No. 187, 2016, drafted by D on March 3, 2016 by D, the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff.
Basic Facts
Article 1 (Loan and Lending of Money) The creditor (Defendant) lent KRW 30 million to the debtor on February 3, 2016, and the debtor borrowed it.
Article 2 (Period and Method of Payment) The full repayment shall be made by June 30, 2016.
Article 3 (Interest) The interest at the rate of 24% per annum shall be paid.
Article 8 (Joint and Several Guarantees) ① The surety (E) has agreed to guarantee the debtor’s obligation under this Agreement and to jointly and severally with the debtor to perform the obligation.
(2) The maximum amount of the surety's guarantee liability is KRW 30 million.
(3) The term of guarantee obligation shall be three years.
Article 9 (Recognition and Recognition of Compulsory Execution) When an obligor and a joint guarantor fail to perform a pecuniary obligation under this contract, they recognized and recognized that there is no objection even if they are immediately subject to compulsory execution.
A notary public, on March 3, 2016, prepared as follows a notarial deed with the commission of E, a joint and several surety of the defendant who is a creditor and the plaintiff's agent, as a joint and several surety, as follows, No. 187 of the 2016.
(hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”). 【The summary of the allegations by the parties indicated in the evidence No. 1 of this case is invalid as it was voluntarily commissioned by E, even though there was no fact delegated by the Plaintiff.
Defendant’s Notarial Deed is valid as written by the Plaintiff’s lawful delegation.
Even if not, in light of the relationship between E and the plaintiff, the expression agency is established in the light of the relationship between E and the plaintiff, and the notarial deed of this case was ratified by the plaintiff, such as requesting the postponement of the auction date while the plaintiff would repay his obligation during the process of compulsory auction based on the notarial deed of this case
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.
Judgment
The indication of recognition of execution that a notarial deed as to the existence of power of representation at the time of commission is an executive title is an act of litigation against a notary public, so a notarial deed is prepared by a commission of an unauthorized representative.