1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff was 205 No. 715, which was prepared by the Multiururury Law Firm on October 21, 2005.

1. The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, and 11, the witness C's testimony, the fact inquiry results against the Law Firm Multiur and the whole purport of the pleadings:

On November 9, 2004, the Plaintiff had a divorce between C and C.

B. On October 21, 2005, C, which was the former husband of C, was made by a notary public located in the Daury Office of Law Firm 365-16, which was possible with the Defendant on October 21, 2005, to the attorney-at-law in charge of authentication of the said law firm “C, on October 21, 2005, borrowed KRW 115,00,000 from the Defendant at maturity of October 20, 2008 at interest rate of 36% per annum, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan debt of C, and if C and the Plaintiff fail to perform the above loan debt, they entrusted C and the Plaintiff to prepare a notarial deed of monetary loan loan contract to the effect that there is no objection even if there is no objection.” On the same day, a notary public drafted a notarial deed of monetary loan contract (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

C. The notarial deed of this case contains a letter of delegation with the seal imprint affixed to the Plaintiff’s name and a certificate of the Plaintiff’s personal seal impression. The Plaintiff’s certificate was issued by C on behalf of the Plaintiff.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion does not have granted C the power of representation as to joint and several sureties with respect to the preparation of the notarial deed in this case. Thus, the notarial deed in this case is null and void by the commission of an unauthorized representative.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case against the defendant against the plaintiff should be rejected.

B. The defendant's assertion C was duly delegated by the plaintiff and entrusted the preparation of the notarial deed of this case. Thus, the notarial deed of this case is valid.

3. Determination

(a) A notarial deed may have an executory power as a title;