1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence examined in the court of first instance shows the records, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for the addition of the following phrases and judgments to the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is also accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The addition;

A. At the third bottom of the judgment of the first instance, the phrase “no evidence exists” as referred to in the second sentence is added next to the following:

[In full view of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 6, Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, as a whole, D, the plaintiff's spouse, borrowed money from the defendant and prepared the notarial deed of this case with the plaintiff's proxy as the plaintiff's agent, and as a result, D was convicted of fraud, and D was convicted of fraud, and "the facts D did not obtain permission (Delegation) for the joint and several guarantee from the plaintiff" among the facts constituting the crime of the judgment of conviction. [In Incheon District Court Decision 2018Da2344, Jul. 25, 2018; Prosecutor only appealed on the ground of unreasonable sentencing and continue the trial at the present appellate court.

(In light of these circumstances, the Incheon District Court 2018No2597) and the fact D seems to have not obtained the power of representation for joint and several sureties from the Plaintiff.

B. The defendant asserts that since D used the money borrowed from the plaintiff as his spouse in the daily home life of both spouses together with the plaintiff, he is liable to the plaintiff.

Since the indication of an execution recognition and recognition that a notarial deed may have an executory power as an executory title is the litigation against a notary public, when a notarial deed is prepared by a commission of an executory representative.