The part of the lawsuit in this case concerning the confirmation of existence of the obligation shall be dismissed.

A notary public against the defendant's joint office C.

1. We examine the legitimacy of a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of an obligation ex officio, as to the lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of an obligation.

If there are reasons such as non-existence, non-existence, non-existence, lapse, etc. before or after the preparation of a notarial deed on the basis of the obligation which was the basis of a notarial deed, it becomes the most effective and appropriate means for resolving the dispute.

Therefore, if a debtor files a lawsuit of demurrer, which is the most effective to remove the most effective time and danger existing in the rights or legal status, and the appropriate means, there is no benefit to confirm the existence of an obligation arising therefrom.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2019Da235733 Decided November 28, 2019). The Plaintiff asserted that a notary public’s debt based on the No. 266 of the 2007 Deed No. 2007, which was drafted a C Joint Office, has expired due to the completion of extinctive prescription, and filed a lawsuit of confirmation of non-existence of the obligation along with a lawsuit of objection to the claim excluding the executory power of the notarial deed. In light of the foregoing legal principles, the part of confirmation of non-existence of the obligation among

2. Since the facts constituting the ground of appeal as to the claim objection suit are deemed to be the confession of the Defendant, the statute of limitations for the Plaintiff’s obligation to borrow money as of September 22, 2005 against the Defendant has expired.

Therefore, a notary public of the defendant against the plaintiff should be denied compulsory execution based on C Joint Office No. 266 of 2007 No. 266.

3. In conclusion, the part seeking the confirmation of the existence of an obligation among the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as there is no interest in the lawsuit, and the part of the objection as to the claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.