1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is a notarial deed of monetary loan agreement No. 77 of 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 29, 2016, while the Plaintiff, with her husband C, operated “E” (hereinafter “the instant private teaching institute”), a single-time teaching institute located in “E” (hereinafter referred to as “the instant private teaching institute”), the Plaintiff transferred the business of the said private teaching institute to the Defendant for a premium of KRW 94 million, and thereafter, the Plaintiff operated a private teaching institute, separately, while continuing to serve as an English teacher of the instant private teaching institute as the English teacher of the instant private teaching institute.

B. After the transfer of the above business, there was a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the ground that seven students of the instant driving school were transferred to the Plaintiff’s driving school.

On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded that the above seven persons will no longer be discussed by the Defendant, and ② thereafter, if it is discovered that only one of the students enrolled in the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute is present at the Plaintiff’s private teaching institute, the Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant KRW 100 million as damages: Provided, That the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to invalidate the notarial deed without claiming KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant agreement”), and on the same day, a notary public, law firm South Korea, which made the Defendant a notarial deed (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”) under a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”) under subparagraph 77 of 2017, which was made on the same day to secure this.

C. On May 16, 2017, the Defendant closed the instant private teaching institute. After preparing the instant notarial deed, some of the students attending the instant private teaching institute, such as F, G, H, I, J, J, K, L, M, N,O, and P, were closed, and paid tuition fees to the Plaintiff.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, NH Nong Bank's financial transaction information reply and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is accompanied by the Plaintiff’s attending the instant driving school.