1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On February 8, 2017, the Plaintiff issued and delivered to the Defendant one copy of a promissory note (the face value of KRW 1,000,000,000, and the date of issuance February 8, 2017, and the date of payment May 31, 2017; hereinafter “instant promissory note”) to the Defendant. On the same day, the Plaintiff prepared and issued a notarial deed as stated in the purport of the claim for the instant promissory note (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”).

[Reasons for Recognition] In the process of selling (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) land owned by the Defendant and the Plaintiff’s wife, etc. to a central construction corporation, the Plaintiff issued the instant promissory note in good faith to the purport that the Defendant guarantees the purchase price to be received, and prepared and executed the instant notarial deed in good faith.

However, the sales contract of this case was terminated later, so the sale contract of this case, which is premised on the validity of the sales contract, shall be null and void all of the promissory notes or authentic deeds.

Even if this case’s notarial deed is valid,

Even if the defendant bears the obligation to transfer ownership to the plaintiff with respect to the share of the land which is the object of the contract of this case, and the above obligation of the defendant is also concurrently performed with the obligation to pay promissory notes to the defendant.

The plaintiff alleged that the issuance of the Promissory Notes and the preparation of a notarial deed are premised on the validity of the sales contract of this case, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge it only with the evidence submitted by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff’s issuance of the Promissory Notes to the Defendant, and the preparation and execution of the Nos. 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and Eul’s Nos. 1 through 5 (including serial numbers), and the entire purport of the testimony and pleadings by the witness C, as a whole, are deemed to have been added to the above evidence.