1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiffs is No. 297 of April 10, 2009.

On March 3, 2009, D, the father of the plaintiffs, such as the preparation of the notarial deed demanding the exclusion of enforcement, entered into a partnership business agreement with the defendant on Fjuju-si E, and leased and operated the above gas station under the joint name of the defendant.

After that, D, on October 1, 2009, prepared a contract for the termination of the business with the defendant and changed D alone the name of business registration.

On the other hand, on March 16, 2010, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of G, the defendant's birth, for sale due to voluntary auction in the name of G.

On April 10, 2009, the Defendant: (a) as an agent for joint and several obligors jointly and severally liable with creditors under No. 297, No. 2009; and (b) as an agent for joint and several obligors, the Defendant: (c) entrusted a notary public with the preparation of a notarial deed in a monetary consumer loan agreement with the purport that “the Defendant, the obligee, is jointly and severally liable for payment of KRW 300 million on March 3, 2009; and (d) the Plaintiffs, etc., shall repay it in lump sum on July 31, 2009; and (e) shall pay damages for delay at a rate of 20% on delay; and (e) completed a notarial deed stating that there is no objection even if compulsory execution is conducted (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”).

After the Defendant received prior personal seal impressions of the Plaintiffs, etc. and the personal seal impressions of the Plaintiffs, etc., the Defendant affixed the above personal seal impressions and signed a proxy form in the names of the Plaintiffs, etc., and submitted them as data proving the right of representation regarding the preparation and commission of authentic deeds, along with

【In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiffs are entitled to commission due to the respective descriptions of No. 2-1, No. 2, and No. 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a whole. The Plaintiffs are entitled to commission due to unauthorized Representation for the exclusion of the purport of the entire pleadings. The Plaintiffs are entitled to grant the Defendant the Plaintiff’s seal imprint and seal imprint and seal imprint, which were voluntarily brought from the Plaintiff’s seal imprint and seal imprint, and the main points of Plaintiff B’