Whether the provisions of Article 485 of the Civil Procedure Act, which Article 485 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that an execution clause shall be granted only when the presiding judge issues an order, shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of a notarial deed where the creditor has

In light of the fact that Article 522(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 522(2) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 4201, Jan. 13, 1990) stipulate that "a judgment on grant of multiple execution clause shall be rendered by a single judge of the district court having jurisdiction over whether a notary public has his/her official address" are deleted, and thus the grant of execution clause is made as a notary public's exclusive right, if a notary public requests again for the execution clause without returning the execution clause granted before the creditor, the provisions of Article 485 of the Civil Procedure Act that Article 485 of the same Act, which Article 485 of the same Act,

Articles 522(1) and 485 of the Civil Procedure Act; Article 522(2) of the former Civil Procedure Act (amended by Act No. 4201, Jan. 13, 1990)

If a notary public is the Dong-Seoul Joint Law Office

The motion of this case is dismissed.

The execution clause of a deed prepared by a notary public under Article 522(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a notary public shall grant the execution clause of a deed preserved by the notary public. In light of the fact that Article 522(2) of the former Civil Procedure Act provides that a notary public shall grant another execution clause of a deed by eliminating the provision that a notary public shall grant it by a single judge of the district court having jurisdiction over a person having an address in the course of his/her duties and allowing the notary public to grant it as a joint right of a notary public, the provision of Article 485 of the Civil Procedure Act, which provides that the execution clause shall be granted only when the presiding judge issues an order of a presiding judge, shall not apply mutatis mutandis in the case of a notarial deed, and therefore, the request of the applicant seeking permission of a party member in granting an executory notarial deed is unlawful as it is an application for permission

Judge Yang Sung-soo