1. The plaintiff's claim that the court changed in exchange is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff’s total costs of litigation.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff added the following “2. Additional Determination” to the allegations added by this court; and (b) the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for partial revision as follows, is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment; (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance, “A Promissory Notes have been issued” shall be amended to “A Promissory Notes (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) have been issued.”

After three pages 5 of the first instance judgment, the part of “The notarial deed of this case is written by the defendant as an agent of the issuer (Plaintiff) and as an addressee is added.”

The following shall be added to 3 pages 9 of the first instance judgment:

A person shall be appointed.

E. D paid a total of KRW 10 million to the Defendant on November 28, 2017 and January 5, 2018, respectively, and paid KRW 5 million to G Co., Ltd. on March 28, 2018.

[Judgment of the court below] The facts that there is no dispute (based on recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3 (including paper numbers), and the purport of the whole testimony and pleading of the witness D

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 of the parties did not issue the Promissory Notes and did not grant the right of representation to the Defendant regarding the preparation of the Notarial Deed of this case. The Promissory Notes of this case were issued at will by using the Plaintiff’s representative director’s personal seal impression, who is not the actual representative director of the Plaintiff, and only employees D, and the Plaintiff issued the Promissory Notes of this case to the Defendant under the name of the Plaintiff, and the Notarial Deed of this case was made up with a power of representation regarding the commission of the preparation of Notarial Deed

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of the Promissory Notes in this case should not be permitted.

Nevertheless, it is not possible.