1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around October 2012, C requested the Plaintiff to lend money to the purport that “A lessor, D, lessee, or lease deposit 150 million won (hereinafter “instant lease contract”) shall be transferred to the Plaintiff with the right to claim the return of deposit against D, and the authentication of a promissory note in the name of D,” which entered the lease contract (hereinafter “instant lease contract”). On October 30, 2012, C and D’s children visited the Defendant’s notarial office together with F, a notary public in the name of the attorney-at-law in charge of authentication in charge of authentication, visiting the Defendant’s notarial office with the Defendant’s notarial office, and prepared a notarial deed as C, D, F, Plaintiff, face value 150 million won, face value 150 million won, and KRW 1300 million from the date of payment of the notarial deed (hereinafter “No. 1300 million won”).

B. Around November 2012, H loaned KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) a request from the Plaintiff to lend money to the effect that “A person would transfer his/her right to claim the return of deposit to the Plaintiff, and I would have a promissory note notarized in his/her name.” (ii) On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s notarial office together with the Defendant’s non-titled names, and then a notary public in the name of the attorney-at-law in charge of the authentication in charge of the authentication visited the Defendant’s notarial office as well as the Defendant’s notarial office under the name of H, I, the payee, the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s face value KRW 110,000,000 as of April 6, 2013 (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) and lent KRW 70 million to H.

C. On December 2012, K requested the Plaintiff to lend money to the effect that “A lessee shall transfer to the Plaintiff the right to claim the return of deposit against L, and shall allow L, a promissory note in his name.” 2) The Plaintiff visited the Defendant’s office of notarial affairs, accompanied by K and a person with no name, on December 14, 2012.