The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and C filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to seek non-performance of compulsory execution based on the No. 461 of the D Deed No. 2015 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) against the Plaintiff and C by a notary public against the Plaintiff and C.

B. In the first instance court of the instant claim, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that, on February 2014, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 80 million from the Defendant as the litigation cost of other cases in which the Plaintiff is involved, and agreed to repay KRW 110 million including interest and expenses, etc., and on August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared the instant Notarial Deed and repaid KRW 50 million on June 3, 2014, and on December 26, 2017, in full, paid KRW 60 million. However, the first instance court rejected the Plaintiff’s payment on August 31, 2015, which was subsequent to the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 50 million to the Defendant, and thus, it is difficult to view that the remainder of the Plaintiff’s payment was already included in the said Notarial Deed and KRW 60 million.

C. In the appellate court of the instant claim, the Plaintiff asserted that the agreement that the Defendant lent money to the Plaintiff for the purpose of using it as litigation costs and that the Plaintiff was additionally paid the principal amount of the loan as a successful case in another lawsuit case was either an agreement violating the Interest Limitation Act or null and void against the public order and good morals, but all of its arguments were not accepted.

Ultimately, on January 6, 2019, the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the remainder of the claims of the Plaintiff and C, and the Plaintiff and C. Accordingly, on January 6, 2019, the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing compulsory execution based on the original copy of the instant notarial deed only in excess of KRW 50 million.