1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff did not delegate his/her authority to entrust the preparation of a notarial deed to his/her mother C (former B:D), the Defendant entrusted the preparation of a promissory note of KRW 15 million in the form of a notarial deed using the Plaintiff’s seal impression and a certificate of personal seal impression held by C on June 10, 2013 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with the notarial deed of KRW 15 million in the form of a notarial deed using the Plaintiff’s seal impression and a certificate of personal seal impression held by C, the above notarial deed is null and void by a commission to prepare and commission a notarial deed by an unauthorized agent. Accordingly, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case should be denied.

B. Even if a notarial deed is valid, since C, the principal obligor, has fully repaid the Defendant’s obligations under the notarial deed, compulsory execution against the Plaintiff in the position of joint and several sureties shall be dismissed.

2. Determination

A. As to the validity of a notarial deed, (1) The indication of the recognition of execution that a notarial deed allows a notarial deed to have an executory power as an executory power is an action against a notary public, so it is not effective as an executory power in a case where a notarial deed is prepared by a commission of an executory power agent (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Da2803, Mar. 24, 2006). The burden of proving that a notarial deed has an executory power to commission the preparation of the

(See Supreme Court Decision 208Da42195 Decided September 25, 2008 (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da42195, Sept. 25, 2008). (2) The following circumstances recognized by the health care unit, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, part of Eul testimony and the entire purport of oral argument, namely, ① on Oct. 20, 2014, “A has come to a loan due to telephone consultation with the Plaintiff at the time of preparation of authentic deed” (Evidence No. 1). ② The authentic deed contains a certificate of personal seal impression issued directly by the Plaintiff himself/herself and affixed the Plaintiff’s seal imprint, and the attorney-at-law in charge of the authentication in charge of the authentication in June 13, 2013.