1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a child of C, and the defendant is a creditor of C.

B. On September 5, 2014, the Plaintiff issued to the Defendant a promissory note amounting to KRW 20 million at face value, KRW 20,000,000,000 for a place of issue and payment, and KRW 20,000,000 for a date of payment (hereinafter “instant promissory note”). On the same day, at the Defendant’s request representing the Plaintiff, a notary public belonging to the Incheon District Public Prosecutor’s Office, who delayed the payment of the instant Promissory Notes to the bearer of the instant Promissory Notes under No. 00807, 2014, a notary public, who was affiliated with the Incheon Public Prosecutor’s Office, written a notarized deed (hereinafter “instant authentic deed”).

C. On August 26, 2016, the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order against the Plaintiff’s deposit claim based on the instant notarized deed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 8 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff and the Defendant did not act as a cause for the Promissory Notes. Although the Plaintiff did not delegate to the Defendant the right to prepare the instant Notarial Deed on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Defendant forged the Plaintiff’s seal impression certificate and the certificate of personal seal impression and prepared the instant Notarial Deed, the instant Notarial Deed is null and void. 2) Since the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff is KRW 20 million, and the Plaintiff issued the Promissory Notes, the issuance of the instant Promissory Notes is revoked.

B. 1) Whether a notarial deed is void or not can be acknowledged as follows, comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings, as indicated in Gap’s evidence Nos. 4, 5, 8, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the serial numbers) and as a whole, C bears the loan and fraternity’s obligation against the defendant on July 14, 2014.