1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is a notarial deed with the executory power of No. 9949, 2012.

1. Basic facts

A.D has been supplied with sirens and other articles by the Defendant.

B. On September 11, 2012, the Plaintiff and D drafted a notary public E-document No. 9949 (Quasi-Loan for Consumption) agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant to jointly repay KRW 173,176,929 as to the amount of goods unpaid to the Defendant until September 30, 2012. On August 31, 2017, the Plaintiff and D had the said notarial deed transferred by C with the resignation of the said notary public.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant authentic deed”). C.

The plaintiff was entered in the notarial deed of this case as the debtor, and D signed and sealed the notarial deed as the debtor and the plaintiff's representative.

(hereinafter, the Plaintiff’s obligation under the instant authentic deed is d. (hereinafter “instant obligation”).

On May 24, 2018, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order regarding the Plaintiff’s deposit claim based on the instant authentic deed.

(A) The following facts are found: (a) there is no dispute; (b) evidence Nos. 1 through 3; (c) entry of evidence Nos. 3 and 3; and (d) the purport of the whole pleadings; and (c) the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Summary and determination of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiff’s claim is that the instant obligation is the price for the goods, and the extinctive prescription period is three years pursuant to Article 163 subparag. 6 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, since the debt of this case was three years from September 30, 2012, which was due, and three years from September 30, 2012, and the extinctive prescription has already been completed and terminated on September 30, 2015, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case shall be denied

B. The Defendant’s assertion (1) The notarial deed of this case is an agreement that the price of the existing goods is the object of a loan for consumption, and the merchant's business is limited to the period of extinctive prescription of the present debt, so the period of extinctive prescription is five

Therefore, the extinctive prescription has not been completed.

(2) The instant obligation externally and externally has the nature of a surety obligation.