1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts [Grounds for recognition] Gap 1, 2, Eul 1, and 2; the purport of the whole arguments and arguments is from around 2009 to Eul 1 and 2; the plaintiff has two children as a de facto marital relationship with Eul ; it is the representative director from the time of establishment of the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "foreign Co., Ltd."), but C actually operated the non-party company.

On July 2015, the defendant paid off the installment debt of the non-party company on behalf of the non-party company and demanded its collateral.

C On July 24, 2015, with the Plaintiff’s seal impression and the certificate of personal seal impression, drafted a promissory note of KRW 86 million at the face value of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint issuer and the issuer’s agent, and prepared and issued the instant notarial deed as the issuer and the issuer’s agent.

Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant was issued a decision to commence an auction (hereinafter referred to as “instant auction”) by filing an application for a compulsory auction of real estate E with the court.

2. Summary of the argument and judgment: C prepared the notarial deed of this case without authority on the basis that it has the plaintiff's identification card, etc., and thus, C is null and void, and compulsory execution based thereon must be dismissed.

판 단 :을 3∽5호증(가지번호 포함)의 각 기재 또는 영상, 변론 전체의 취지에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정에 비추어 보면, 이 사건 공정증서는 적법한 대리권에 기하여 작성되었다고 봄이 상당하므로, 이와 다른 전제에 선 원고의 주장은 이유 없다.

① Although a de facto marital relationship with C was terminated in around 2014, the Plaintiff is difficult to believe some of the witness C’s testimony, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, according to the above evidence, the plaintiff was the representative director of the non-party company until June 2016, immediately before the commencement of the above auction and the institution of this case, and it seems that he still lives together.

② The present law firm notified the Plaintiff of the preparation of the Notarial Deed, and the Plaintiff did not take any measure against this.