beta
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2016.11.29 2016가단2317

채무부존재확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. On February 4, 2013, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) signed a notarial deed of monetary loan agreement (No. 41 of the 2013 Document No. 2013, a notary public drafted a notary public’s general legal affairs of port and port, and a notary public drafted a notarial deed (No. 41 of the 2013 Document) with a maturity of KRW 9,00,000 to the Defendant; (b) interest rate of KRW

However, without knowledge of the validity of the above notarial deed, the Plaintiff prepared the above notarial deed upon C’s request. Since the Defendant did not actually receive a loan of KRW 9,000,000 from the Defendant, there is no obligation of KRW 9,00,000 based on the above notarial deed.

2. The fact that the Plaintiff, on February 4, 2013, drafted a notarial deed on a monetary loan agreement with the purport that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 9,000,000 from the Defendant as of May 4, 2013 due date, KRW 20% per annum of interest, and KRW 20% per annum of delay damages (No. 41 of the deed 2013 by a notary public at a law firm’s general law office of port 2013) does not conflict between the parties.

In addition, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above notarial deed is null and void on the ground that the statement of No. 2, or the ground for the plaintiff's assertion, that is, the plaintiff only prepared the above notarial deed upon C's request, and that there is no money actually received from the defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Accordingly, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.