1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The No. 684 of the Jungwon General Law Firm No. 1997, a testamentary document No. 684 (hereinafter “the testamentary document of this case”) was prepared on May 12, 1997, and signed and sealed as a witness of the testamentary document of this case.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant died on July 22, 201, with the deceased’s children and the deceased.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. In accordance with Article 1068 of the Civil Code, the will by the plaintiff's assertion of the plaintiff should be made by delivering the testator as a verbal statement before a notary in the presence of two witnesses and reading it by the notary, and then signing or sealing each testator and witness after approving the accuracy of the testator and witness. Although D and E did not attend the procedure of preparing the will of this case as a witness, as the defendant forged his signature as if D and E were present, the will of this case is null and void.

3. The authentication system for a deed signed by a private person provided for in the Notary Public Act has the party concerned sign or affix a seal on the deed signed by a private person in front of a notary public, or has the party concerned or his/her agent confirm the signature or affix a seal on the deed signed by a private person and then a notary public enters the fact in the deed (Article 57(1) of the Notary Public Act). In notarial deeds signed by a private person, the authentication system stipulated in the Notary Public Act requires prior procedures for confirmation (Article 27) of the client pursuant to the Notary Public Act. Thus, barring any special circumstance, such as assertion and proof that a notary public did not go through the same procedure in authentication for a deed signed by a private person, the authenticity of a deed signed by a notary public is presumed to have been established (see Supreme Court Order 2008S119, Jan. 16, 2009).