A. On June 13, 2014, a certified judicial scrivener C commissioned a notary public to prepare a notarial deed of promissory note amounting to KRW 50 million on behalf of both an issuer D and the Plaintiff, and the Defendant on behalf of both the issuer D and the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, and signed a notarial deed of promissory note as indicated on the same day (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

B. D is the Plaintiff’s form.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. The plaintiff's assertion did not grant D or C the authority to commission the preparation of the notarial deed of this case.

Therefore, the notarial deed of this case is null and void, and compulsory execution based thereon should be rejected.

3. Determination

A. Legal doctrine 1) Inasmuch as an expression of intent of an execution recognition and recognition that a notarial deed has an executory power as an executory power is an act of litigation against a notary public, it is not effective as an executory power in case where a notarial deed has been made upon a commission of an executory power agent, and the burden of proof as to the existence of an executory power in preparing such notarial deed is an obligee who asserts its effect. The authenticity of the portion drawn up by a notary public of a notarial deed is presumed, but it is presumed that an agent has entrusted the preparation of a notarial deed and that there is a legitimate power of attorney (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da18114, Jun. 28, 2002). 2) Seal imprint and a certificate of personal seal impression are merely one material that can recognize a power of attorney, and thus, it does not necessarily mean that a right of attorney to enter into a money loan contract or to commission the preparation of a notarial deed as to such contract

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da42195, Sept. 25, 2008). 3 also, a seal affixed to a document shall be affixed with his/her seal.