beta
Text
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne respectively by each party.
Reasons
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. Basic facts
A. On May 22, 2009, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note as of August 21, 2009 with E and the Plaintiff as the issuer, the Defendant as the addressee, and a promissory note as of August 21, 2009 with a maturity of KRW 75,00,000, and the due date of payment, and the said promissory note as of August 21, 2009 by a notary public as to the said promissory note as of January 241, 209 (hereinafter “notarial deed 1”).
(2) On September 24, 2009, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note with C’s face value of KRW 75,000,000 at sight of the date of payment, and a promissory note with a maturity of KRW 75,00,000 with the Plaintiff’s agent as the issuer, and a notary public prepared a notarized promissory note with the executory power of No. 418, 2009 (hereinafter “notarial deed 2”) with respect to the said promissory note, and then issued it to C.
3) On March 3, 2010, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note as of September 3, 2010, with the Plaintiff as the issuer, the Defendant as the addressee, with the face value of KRW 75,00,000,000, and the due date of September 3, 2010, and with respect to the said promissory note, a notary public issued a notarial deed with executory power under No. 102 of the 2010 (hereinafter “third authentic deed”).
(4) On August 4, 2010, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note with a maturity of KRW 150,000,000, and the due date of August 3, 2011 with the Plaintiff as the issuer and the Defendant as the addressee, and the said promissory note with a maturity of KRW 150,000,000, and the said promissory note as of August 3, 2011, a notary public prepared a notarial deed with a maturity of No. 453 of the law firm Thai (hereinafter “notarial deed No. 4”) with respect to the said promissory note, and issued it to the Defendant
5. On January 7, 2011, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note with the face value of KRW 500,000,000 and the due date of January 7, 2012 with the Plaintiff as the issuer, and with the Defendant’s husband as the payee D, the Plaintiff’s husband. The said promissory note is enforceable by a notary public as the law firm Thai (18) in January 2011.