No. 236 of the deed prepared by C on May 31, 2018 by the defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The plaintiff is the representative director of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff Co., Ltd.") whose main business is consulting on insurance sales, and the defendant is an insurance agency business.

B. On May 31, 2018, the Plaintiff drafted and issued to the Defendant a notarial deed of monetary loan agreement No. 236 of 2018 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall borrow KRW 45 million from the Defendant and make payment in 10,000,000 each month from June 25, 2018 to March 2019, by a notary public, which provides that “The Plaintiff shall make payment in 45,000 won each month from June 2018 to March 2019.”

C. On June 29, 2018, the Plaintiff, on June 29, 2018, drafted and issued to the Defendant a notarial deed of monetary loan agreement No. 302 of 2018 (hereinafter “additional notarial deed”) with the purport that “the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 30 million from the Defendant, and the Plaintiff will make payment in ten installments each month from July 2018 to April 2019, in total, KRW 3 million.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff prepared the notarial deed of this case by borrowing KRW 45 million from the defendant as operating expenses of the plaintiff company, but thereafter, the defendant did not lend KRW 45 million to the plaintiff. Thus, the notarial deed of this case has no validity and compulsory execution based thereon should be denied.

The defendant asserts that the notarial deed of this case is valid and compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case is justified, since the plaintiff borrowed money from the defendant as operating expenses of the plaintiff company and prepared the notarial deed of this case to guarantee the payment of the existing debt to the defendant of E (the employee of the company operated by the plaintiff) in addition to the additional notarial deed.

B. We examine the judgment.