1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. On July 30, 2018, the fact that the Plaintiff prepared the instant notarial deed (Evidence A 1) stating that “the Plaintiff shall pay in installments the amount of KRW 24 million borrowed from the Defendant by August 1, 2021,” between the Defendant and the Defendant, does not conflict between the parties.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiff's preparation of the notarial deed was discovered that the plaintiff's age and marriage history were attributed to D while living with D by the defendant's children, and it was only prepared according to the defendant's demand by the defendant in a complicated trial, such as how you want to maintain the relationship with D, and how you want to commit a crime against D, etc., but it was argued that D or the defendant unilaterally arranged the relationship with D or the defendant with the plaintiff on the ground that D or the defendant's coercion or deception was revoked.

B. However, each of the plaintiff's assertion and Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6 alone is insufficient to deem that there was a coercion or deception by D or defendant as alleged by the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

(M) In other words, the defendant prepared that the plaintiff will repay the loan in installments, which belongs to his family, and borrowed as a business fund, and suggested various evidences that are different from this issue.

Therefore, the claim of this case in which the plaintiff asserts that the contract which was the cause of the notarial deed of this case should be revoked by coercion or deception, and that the execution based on the notarial deed of this case shall not be accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.