1. A notary public against the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) of the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff in February 18, 2008 prepared by the notary public on February 18, 2008.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. From July 2004 to November 201, the Plaintiff traded promissory notes and the shares of shares on the grounds of payment of the price for the Defendant and drugs, cash borrowing, etc.

B. On February 15, 2008, in order to secure the Defendant’s obligation for promissory notes and check bills, the Plaintiff prepared a loan certificate with “20 million won for borrowed money, and two months from February 15, 2008 to April 15, 2008,” and on February 18, 2008, a notary public, with the content that “the Plaintiff bears 200 million won for the Defendant” as stated in the above loan certificate, prepared a notarial deed (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the content that “the Plaintiff bears 200 million won for the Defendant according to the agreement entered into on February 18, 2008.”

C. Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant filed an application with the Daegu District Court for the attachment and assignment order of claims with respect to the Plaintiff’s claims against the Republic of Korea and the National Health Insurance Corporation under the notarial deed of this case. The Defendant received an order of seizure and assignment of claims from the said court on February 25, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to Gap's evidence No. 3 (a receipt and appraiser C's seal appraisal result, it is recognized that the following stamp image of the defendant's name is based on the seal of the defendant, and the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established. The defendant defense that the above document was forged by the plaintiff, but no evidence exists to acknowledge it) as to the claim of this lawsuit, the plaintiff can be acknowledged on October 21, 2009 with the approval of the bill borrowed from the defendant from the defendant to the same day.

According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to view that all of the plaintiff's obligations based on the notarial deed of this case were extinguished. Therefore, the defendant's compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case shall be

3. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The defense prior to the merits