beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is a promissory note No. 1872, April 25, 2013, drafted by both law firms.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On February 14, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract with the head of the Defendant to commission the head of the Defendant to conclude an insurance contract, etc. (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the content that the Plaintiff is commissioned as the head of the Defendant’s branch, and the Defendant is entrusted by the Defendant to perform the duties of insurance contract brokerage, etc., and the Defendant
(No. 1). (b)
In order to secure the obligation to refund fees, etc. to the Defendant arising from the termination of an insurance contract arranged under the instant contract due to the termination, invalidation, etc. (hereinafter “the obligation to refund fees of this case”), the Plaintiff issued one copy of the Promissory Notes (hereinafter “the Promissory Notes of this case”) to the Defendant on March 5, 2013 (hereinafter “the Promissory Notes of this case”). The Plaintiff’s husband C signed and sealed the Plaintiff as the guarantor for the Plaintiff on the front of the Promissory Notes of this case.
C simply signed and sealed the part of the “ issuer” in the front column of the Promissory Notes, and simply signed and sealed the part on the front side of the Promissory Notes, and in the absence of a simple signature and seal or signature, it shall be deemed to have been guaranteed for the drawer (Articles 77(3), 31(3), and 31(4) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act). In addition, on April 25, 2013, the Plaintiff and C signed and sealed No. 1872 (hereinafter “notarial deeds of this case”) of the said notarial deed to the effect that a notary public is aware of the absence of objection even if he is immediately subject to compulsory execution when he delays the payment of the said Promissory Notes, the said deed of this case was written on commission.
C. Con January 23, 2014, remitted KRW 50 million to the account of Jeonbuk Bank under the name of the Defendant.
On December 22, 2015, the defendant is the defendant's territorial branch of the Chuncheon District Court based on the Notarial Deed of this case.