A. As of August 19, 2004, the No. 7276 of the notarial deed of debt repayment contract was prepared by a notary public at the Jeonju (former North Korean Joint Law Office) joint law office (hereinafter “this case’s notarial deed”) and its main contents are as follows.

The debtor: The debtor: The defendant's joint and several sureties of the non-party D (the plaintiff's mother): The defendant's purpose: The method of effecting the debtor's liability of KRW 15 million based on the loan certificate dated November 11, 2003: the payment of the full interest by August 27, 2004: 30% per annum.

B. In preparing the notarial deed of this case, the defendant stated that both the debtor and joint guarantor and the defendant entrusted the preparation of the said notarial deed to the creditor as the principal. Accordingly, the above notarial deed is accompanied by the power of attorney (hereinafter “the power of attorney of this case”) stating that the plaintiffs commission the defendant to prepare the notarial deed and the certificate of personal seal impression that the plaintiffs directly requested and received.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1-1, and the result of fact inquiry by a notary public of this court about the previous law office, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserts that, as the notarial deed of this case was prepared by commission without the authority of the defendant to act on behalf of the plaintiffs and is null and void, compulsory execution based on the above notarial deed should be denied.

Therefore, since the indication of an execution recognition and recognition that a notarial deed allows a notarial deed to have an executory power as an executory power is an act of litigation against a notary public, it is not effective as an executory power when a notarial deed is prepared upon a commission of an unauthorized representative (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da2803, Mar. 24, 2006). A seal imprint and a certificate of seal imprint are nothing more than one material that enables a proxy power, and therefore, the obligee’s transfer of security on behalf of the debtor