1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is an executory power against the Plaintiff, No. 753, 2012 No. 753, a law firm Lee Jong-il.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, along with multiple construction business operators including C around 2009, did not receive the construction cost. As a representative of the Credit Group, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction cost lawsuit”) and carried out the work related to the enforcement of the said lawsuit.

B. In accordance with C’s request, on October 23, 2012, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation to borrow KRW 150 million borrowed from the Defendant on October 23, 2013 with interest rate of KRW 24% (hereinafter “the obligation to borrow the instant loan”). On the same day, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and C drafted a notarial deed for a loan for consumption (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) containing the purport of acceptance of compulsory execution by the law firm No. 2012 and No. 753 on the same day.

C. On February 22, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 170,160,000,000 to E’s account designated by C as a result of the instant lawsuit for construction cost, and C wired KRW 150,000 to the Defendant account on the same day.

On December 19, 2016, the Defendant filed an application for compulsory sale of real estate with the title of execution, and with the amount of claim KRW 186 million in Incheon District Court F, which is the Plaintiff’s name, filed an application for compulsory sale of real estate for the amount of 227 square meters and 15 square meters prior to H in the name of the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the instant loan obligation became extinct by repayment on February 22, 2013, compulsory execution based on the instant Notarial Deed shall be denied.

The defendant, at the time of the loan of this case, lent to C a sum of KRW 300 million, including KRW 150 million, KRW 150 million, and KRW 150 million as joint and several sureties with the plaintiff as joint and several sureties, and the defendant was repaid KRW 150 million from C on February 22, 2013.