1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff was No. 1338 on November 14, 2006, 2006, No. 1338.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 14, 2006, the Plaintiff prepared a notarial deed of a contract for consumption loan (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with a notary public as follows, No. 1338 of the 2006 Djoint Law Office, as the document No. 1338 of 206.

Article 1 (Purpose) The Defendant lent KRW 0,000 to the Plaintiff on May 17, 2006, and the Plaintiff borrowed this.

Article 2 (Period and Method of Repayment) The repayment of principal shall be made on May 31, 2006.

Article 3 (Interest) Interest rate shall be 60% per annum.

Article 5 (Compensation for Delay) When the plaintiff delays the repayment of principal and interest, the late payment damages shall be paid to the defendant at the rate of 25% per annum for the delayed principal and interest.

Article 9 (Recognition and Recognition of Compulsory Execution) When the plaintiff fails to discharge his pecuniary obligation under this contract, the plaintiff acknowledged the absence of objection immediately after compulsory execution.

B. On May 20, 2015, the Defendant, as Suwon District Court E, issued a decision to commence compulsory execution with respect to the instant Nos. 102, 504, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu, the Plaintiff owned the instant notarial deed as the title of execution.

C. After July 7, 2015, the Defendant transferred the full amount of the instant claim based on the Notarial Deed (hereinafter “instant claim”) to the Intervenor succeeding to the Defendant (hereinafter “ Intervenor”), and on July 9, 2015, a notice of assignment of claims was served on the Plaintiff on July 9, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 4 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim against the defendant

A. 1 Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of claim: (a) the Defendant lent KRW 50 million to G with gambling money around May 2006; and (b) the Plaintiff prepared the instant notarial deed while conducting joint and several sureties with respect to the said loan; (c) the Plaintiff is null and void pursuant to Article 103 of the Civil Act; and (d) the Plaintiff settled the existing transaction relationship related to the instant notarial deed with the Defendant on March 8, 2012.