1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is based on the notarial deed of Promissory Notes No. 60, 2015, No. 30.

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged by Gap's evidence 1 to 6, Eul's evidence 1 to 17, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

① On April 17, 2015, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note of KRW 100 million at par value with the Defendant as the addressee. On the same day, when a notary public delays the payment of the said note under No. 60, No. 30, 2015, he/she prepared a notarial deed to the effect that no objection is raised even if he/she is immediately subject to compulsory execution. ② On November 8, 2018, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 2,962,00,000 with the Defendant for compulsory auction (this Court D) established on the above 100 million won and the above notarial deed, as the sum of the execution costs of the said compulsory auction (this Court D), and deposited KRW 2,96,560,00 with the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Court on April 3, 2019.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.