1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff No. 769, Dec. 17, 2014, No. 2014, dated December 17, 2014.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 15, 1975, the Plaintiff married with D on January 15, 1975, but the agreement was married on November 13, 2014.

B. On December 17, 2014, at the joint law office of 2014, a notary public set forth in Article 769 of the Cjoint law office as the interest rate of KRW 24% per annum on December 17, 2014 and the due date of payment on March 17, 2016, the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability is the joint and several liability of the Plaintiff, and the joint and several liability period is up to 24 months. If a notary public fails to perform his/her obligation, a notarial deed of a money loan contract of which no objection is raised (hereinafter “instant authentic deed”).

In preparing the notarial deed of this case, D entrusted the preparation of the notarial deed of this case to the attorney-at-law in charge of the authentication of this case, with the power of attorney-at-law in charge of the authentication of this case, on which the seals affixed in the name of the plaintiff are affixed, and a certificate of personal seal impression issued by himself/herself on behalf of the plaintiff.

C. Around April 2018, the Plaintiff filed a criminal complaint on the grounds of suspicion that D has forged the power of attorney, etc. under the Plaintiff’s name without the Plaintiff’s consent and used the Plaintiff in preparing the instant notarial deed to the effect that D is a joint and several surety for the Defendant.

D) On September 11, 2018, the Jeonju District Court 2018Da4708 (hereinafter referred to as the “former District Court”), D was charged with forging private documents, uttering of the said private documents, false entry of the original of the notarial deed, and uttering of the original of the notarial deed, and was issued a summary order of KRW 5,00,000. The said summary order became final and conclusive on October 26, 2018.

[Judgment of the court below] The ground for recognition is without dispute, Gap's evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 7, and the ground for appeal

2. The indication of the recognition and recognition of execution that a judgment notarial deed allows a person to have executory power as an executory title is an act of litigation against a notary public. Thus, in a case where a notarial deed is prepared upon a commission of an executory representative, it has no effect as an executory title, and Supreme Court Decision 2003.3.