Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On January 14, 2019, D, the Plaintiff, as the issuer, drafted one copy of the Promissory Notes (hereinafter “ Promissory Notes”) with the amount of KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,000,000,000,000

B. D’s qualification as the Plaintiff’s agent entrusting C with the preparation of a notarial deed on January 14, 2019 and entrusting C with a notary public on January 14, 2019. In the event that the payment of the Promissory Notes No. 41 of the 2019 is delayed, D’s notarial deed recognizing that there is no objection even if it is immediately subject to compulsory execution.

(iii) has been drawn up. [The facts without dispute over the basis for recognition, Gap evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff did not commission the Plaintiff’s notary public to prepare the notarial deed of this case, and D does not confer the power of attorney to commission the preparation of the notarial deed of this case, and D entrusted the preparation of the notarial deed of this case as the Plaintiff’s agent. Thus, the notarial deed of this case is null and void by the commission of the unauthorized Agent.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case against the defendant should not be permitted.

B. As Defendant D obtained a power of representation from the Plaintiff to commission the preparation of the instant notarial deed, the instant notarial deed is valid.

3. Determination

A. A. On January 14, 2019, D had the Plaintiff borrow the money to the Plaintiff, and D had the Plaintiff notarized. Whether it could come to the Plaintiff’s door, asked by telephone, and issued Kwik Delivery on the same day the Plaintiff’s identification card, seal imprint, and seal impression to D. 2) D, at the time of commissioning the preparation of the instant authentic deed, shall have the entire authority to commission D to prepare the authentic deed of a bill.