1. The Defendant’s notary public against A was signed on July 30, 2013 by Daejeon General Law Firm, which was signed on July 30, 2013, No. 1856.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 20, 2009, A entered into a stock discretionary investment contract with the Defendant, “The content that an investment is made in stocks on the KOSDAQ with an amount of KRW 50 million and that a performance fee is paid accordingly.”

B. On December 1, 201, A entered into an option consultation agreement with the Defendant on December 1, 201 (hereinafter “instant option agreement”) with regard to investing in options for a period of ranging from December 1, 2011 to December 1, 2018, A entered into an option agreement with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant option agreement”). The content that “in the event of investing in stocks, etc. during the period of 84 months from December 1, 2011, it is required to receive advice from the Defendant and pay fixed remuneration, fees, etc. to the Defendant, and to pay a penalty of 25.2 billion won upon the termination of the contract” (hereinafter “instant option agreement”). (C) The conclusion of an investment advisory agreement with the Defendant on December 28, 2011 and “from December 28, 2011 to December 28, 2013, it is required to receive advice on investment, etc. from the Defendant or to pay fixed fees, etc. to the Defendant.”

On July 30, 2013, A prepared a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement with the defendant as a loan amount of KRW 25.2 billion, due date, August 1, 2013; and a notarial deed with a creditor, defendant, and debtor as a debtor (a notary public No. 1856 of Daejeon General Law Firm 2013; hereinafter referred to as the “notarial deed of this case”).

E. On December 9, 2016, with respect to A, the rehabilitation procedure was commenced by Daejeon District Court 2016dan513 on December 9, 2016, and A became a custodian.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 9, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the instant notarial deed is cancelled for the following reasons.