beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff’s notary public against the Defendant is in the notarial deed No. 2007 No. 2, 2007, Daba, 2007.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 5,00,000 from the Defendant around January 2, 2006. Around January 2, 2007, the Plaintiff: (a) issued a promissory note with a maturity of 6,000,000; (b) the date of payment; (c) the date of payment; (d) the date of payment; and (e) the place of payment; and (e) issued a promissory note with a maturity of 00,000; and (e) the notary public issued a notarial deed stating that there is no objection even if he is immediately subject to compulsory execution when the Plaintiff delays the payment of the said Promissory Notes to the holder of the said Promissory Notes (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).
B. On November 15, 2013, based on the original copy of the instant notarial deed, the Defendant received a claim amounting to KRW 5,000,000,100,000, respectively, as to the claim for return of deposit against the Plaintiff’s Nonghyup Bank Co., Ltd. and the National Bank of Korea, and received a seizure and collection order (Seoul District Court Branch Branch 2013TTT 13475, Nov. 2013). On November 20, 2013, the Defendant seized the corporeal movables owned by the Plaintiff.
(The ground for recognition) 2013No. 4431. [Ground for recognition] / [The fact that there is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence No. 1 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the witness C's testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff received fraternity money from C on March 2008 and paid KRW 5,000,000 to the defendant, the debt under the notarial deed of this case was extinguished by repayment, or the debt under the notarial deed of this case has expired by the five-year prescription period with commercial bonds.
In this regard, the defendant asserts that he did not receive the above money.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by each of the above evidence, Gap evidence, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4, 10, 12, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 5, and Eul evidence Nos. 7, and Eul's testimony and arguments as a whole, namely, Gap-related criminal cases and this court joined the accounts of Eul-gu, and C around March 2008.