1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff, No. 1769, July 21, 201, 201, 201.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 21, 2011, the Defendant entrusted a notary public with the preparation of a notarial deed stating that “The Plaintiff shall be present at the same law firm as the creditor and the debtor’s agent, and that “the Plaintiff shall have interest of KRW 10,00,000 per annum from the Defendant on June 23, 2011 and borrowed KRW 30% per annum from the Defendant on June 23, 2011, and on June 30, 2011, the Plaintiff shall be immediately subject to compulsory execution if the Plaintiff fails to perform the said monetary obligation, and there was no objection to the instant notarial deed” (hereinafter referred to as “instant notarial deed”). On the same day, the instant notarial deed as set forth in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition was drawn up.

B. The power of attorney attached to the notarial deed of this case (hereinafter referred to as “the power of attorney of this case”) states that “a notary public delegates all the authority that the notary public entrusts the preparation of the notarial deed to a law firm in the future with respect to the obligation to borrow money as stated in the above (a) above” to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff’s name and address are written in the column and the Plaintiff’s seal impression is affixed

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 5, Eul evidence 1 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the Plaintiff’s seal impression impression, this is merely a forgery of the Plaintiff’s seal impression and a seal impression affixed to Nonparty C for the purpose of purchasing a vehicle from Nonparty C without the Plaintiff’s permission, and there was no fact that the Plaintiff granted the Defendant the right of representation regarding the preparation of the notarial deed of this case.

Therefore, since the notarial deed of this case is null and void, compulsory execution based on this should not be permitted.

B. The plaintiff visited the defendant's office together with C to affix the plaintiff's seal impression in the letter of delegation of this case, and then deliver it to the defendant. The remaining part of the letter of delegation is written.