1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is No. 95 of the 2008 deed prepared by C on February 25, 2008 by the law firm C.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 31, 2008, the Plaintiff issued and delivered to the Defendant a promissory note with a face value of KRW 1.3 billion at the face value as of February 29, 2008, which is the issuer and the date of payment.

B. On February 25, 2008, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a notarial deed stating that “The issuer of the Promissory Notes in this case shall, upon delay in the payment of the amount of the Promissory Notes, recognize that there is no objection, even if he is immediately subject to compulsory execution against the holder of the Promissory Notes” (hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed in this case) by entrusting a notary public to C law firm.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. On the grounds delineated below, compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case shall not be permitted for the following reasons.

(1) At the time of the issuance of the Promissory Notes, D, a representative director of the Plaintiff, borrowed personal money from the Defendant, and had the Plaintiff stand a joint and several surety for the Plaintiff’s debt. The Promissory Notes of this case were issued to secure the Plaintiff’s joint and several surety

Ultimately, the instant promissory note’s underlying claim is null and void due to D’s breach of trust or abuse of power of representation. Accordingly, the instant promissory note is also null and void.

D. Since the Promissory Notes were issued by the Plaintiff’s joint representative, the Promissory Notes were issued by the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent of D0,000 among them, the Promissory Notes of this case were issued by the non-representative.

•The instant promissory note claim was extinguished by the statute of limitations for three years from the date of payment.

B. We examine whether the instant promissory note claim has expired prior to determining other allegations by the Plaintiff regarding the claim for extinctive prescription.

Pursuant to Articles 77(1)8 and 70(1) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act (amended by Act No. 10198, Mar. 31, 2010), a promissory note claim against the issuer shall be exercised for three years from the due date.