채무부존재확인
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s child, and the Defendant, as a leader, operated a variety of fraternities with D et al. as a fraternity, and engaged in money transactions with D.
B. On April 27, 2011, the Defendant, at a law firm C office, issued a letter of delegation on which the Plaintiff’s seal imprint affixed, and a certificate of personal seal impression issued by the Plaintiff, and drafted, at the law firm C office, a notarial deed of money loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) under Article 931 of the law firm C201, stating that the Plaintiff and the obligee, the obligor, the Plaintiff, the borrower, the loan amount of KRW 30,00,000, the due date for payment shall be 30% per annum, and the interest and delay damages shall be 30% per annum.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff heard the statement from D that it is necessary for directors, etc., and issued a seal imprint certificate and a certificate of personal seal impression. However, since D prepared the instant notarial deed by forging the power of attorney, etc. in the name of the Plaintiff, the instant notarial deed is null and void. 2) The obligation based on the instant notarial deed was fully repaid.
B. 1) Determination 1) In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult for a notary public to believe that the entry of No. 6-1 (fact-finding confirmation) in the instant No. 6-1 (fact-finding confirmation) is consistent with the assertion that the instant notarial deed was forged, as seen earlier, in addition to the entries of No. 11-1 and No. 2 and the results of the inquiry and reply to the fact-finding to the law firm E, in light of the following circumstances.
① Around April 27, 2011, the Defendant operated a number of accounts consisting of D, etc. as a fraternity, and as a result, the Defendant was unable to receive fraternity payments, etc. from D, the Defendant appears to have agreed to receive the notarial deeds in the name of the Plaintiff, which is the Plaintiff’s son, as a collateral against D and to continue transactions.
② As seen earlier, the instant notarial deed was prepared.