1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement No. 873 of 2010 prepared by C.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who operates an entertainment drinking house under the trade name of “E” in Seopo-si, Seopo-si.

On November 26, 2010, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 15 million from the Defendant on the condition that the Defendant was supplied with alcoholic beverages from the limited liability company F (name prior to the change: limited liability company G) with the representative director.

(hereinafter “the instant loan”). (b)

On November 29, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) No. 873, No. 301, 201, in the following cases: “A notary public, from December 25, 2010 to September 25, 2011, stating that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant in installments the amount of KRW 15 million,50,000 on the 25th day of each month, and if the Plaintiff fails to perform his/her obligation, he/she shall be immediately aware that there is no objection even if he/she is subject to compulsory execution” (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

C. From November 30, 201 to October 2, 2011, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 29,235,000 to a limited liability company F, as shown in the attached Form, as the Plaintiff stated.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s admission amounting to KRW 15 million out of KRW 29,235,00,000 is the repayment of the loan of this case, and the remainder KRW 14,235,00 is the repayment of the liquor price supplied by the Plaintiff from the limited liability company F. As such, the Plaintiff’s obligation based on the notarial deed of this case was extinguished by the repayment, or the extinctive prescription of the commercial claim was expired.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case should not be permitted.

B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 9 million out of the borrowed amount of KRW 15 million to the Plaintiff, and the principal remains in KRW 6 million, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 29,235,000 to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff paid KRW 29,235,00 to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the claim for the loan of this case is not a commercial claim, and the ten-year extinctive prescription has not yet expired.

3. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of performance