1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is a notarial deed No. 242 dated November 5, 2007, drawn up by C-Law Office.

1. Basic facts

A. On Nov. 5, 2007, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entrusted the Plaintiff with the preparation of a fair deed stating that “on Apr. 1, 2007, the Defendant shall pay KRW 180 million to the Plaintiff on June 30, 2008, interest rate of KRW 6.5% per annum, and delayed damages of KRW 25% per annum,” and accordingly, the instant fair deed was prepared (hereinafter “instant fair deed”). (b) The Plaintiff’s father D was replaced on Nov. 7, 2007 by the Defendant, “Plaintiff and Plaintiff E after their birth.”

hereinafter referred to as “H”;

Then, the Plaintiff’s 3rd party F borrowed KRW 180 million from the Defendant for business purposes, and signed to pay in cash the principal and interest in the event of failure to repay by June 30, 2008.”

(c)

On October 29, 2019, the Defendant seized 7,000,000 won in total, including the market value of kimchi cooling and washing machines, which were in the Plaintiff’s housing based on the instant work deed (Seoul Central District Court G). 【Ground for recognition: The fact that there is no dispute, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings】

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Since the Defendant issued a notarized letter of waiver of the claim to the Plaintiff after drawing up the instant fair deed, the Defendant extinguished the obligation based on the instant fair deed.

2) The Plaintiff’s obligation based on the instant work deed has already been extinguished by the ten-year statute of limitations prior to the instant lawsuit.

B. The burden of proof on the grounds of objection in a lawsuit of demurrering the claim’s burden of proof should be in accordance with the principle of sharing the burden of proof in general civil procedure.

Therefore, if the plaintiff asserts that the claim has not been established in the lawsuit of demurrer, the defendant is responsible for proving the cause of the claim, and the plaintiff has become null and void or extinguished by repayment as a false representation.