(a) The facts below the basis of facts do not conflict between the Parties;

1) On December 23, 2014, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note with the Defendant as the addressee with the face value of KRW 42.5 million, and the due date as of March 20, 2015. On the same day, a notary public who accepted the issuance of a promissory note with the effect that “if the payment of the said note is delayed to the holder of the said promissory note, a notary public does not have any objection even if he/she is immediately subject to compulsory execution,” as stipulated in the No. 1086 of the Maritime Deed No. 1086 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

2) On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff deposited the amount of KRW 42.5 million with the Incheon District Court No. 4585 in the amount of the Promissory Notes, designating the Defendant as the deposited person.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, since the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant based on the instant notarial deed has ceased to exist due to the above payment deposit, compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed against the Defendant should be denied, barring any special circumstance.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion applied for an auction due to the Plaintiff’s nonperformance of obligation, and disbursed a total of KRW 5,535,000 as indicated in the attached Form as the execution cost.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim until the above execution cost is reimbursed.

B. According to Article 53(1) of the Civil Execution Act, the expenses required for compulsory execution are borne by the debtor and are preferentially reimbursed for the execution. The expenses for such execution are based on the enforcement title that forms the basis for the execution without any separate enforcement title and can be collected together with the claims indicated in the enforcement title in the relevant compulsory execution procedure. As such, in a case of objection, even if the original obligation indicated in the enforcement title is extinguished by repayment or deposit, the expenses for the execution that the debtor is liable to reimburse are not reimbursed.