beta
Text
1. No. 246 and No. 247 of the defendant's certificate of notary public C office against the plaintiff is authentic.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. 1) On March 18, 2008, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed of debt repayment contract with the Defendant, the obligor, the Plaintiff, and the joint guarantor D as the debt amount of KRW 5 million, the due date of maturity of August 9, 2008, and the notary public C office with the interest rate of KRW 30% per annum of August 9, 2008. 2) On the same day, the Plaintiff also drafted a notarial deed of debt repayment contract with the Defendant, the obligor D, and the Plaintiff as the joint guarantor of the above date as the creditor, the obligor D, and the said 30% per annum of the above office.
B. The Defendant issued a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s deposit claim against the NongHyup Co., Ltd., Ltd. with the title of execution of the notarial deed mentioned in the foregoing Paragraph 1, and received a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s deposit claim against the NongHyup Co., Ltd., Ltd. (Seoul District Court Order 2016 Other No. 6247, Apr. 28, 2016), and issued a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s deposit claim
(Decision 2016TTT 6248 dated April 28, 2016). [Judgment 2016TT 6248 dated April 28, 2016] Fact that there is no dispute, and entry of evidence Nos. 3 and 4
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that all the principal obligation and the guaranteed obligation of the plaintiff against the defendant based on each of the above notarial deeds are null and void in violation of good morals and other social order, and since the extinctive prescription of commercial claims expires for five years, compulsory execution based on each of the above notarial deeds should not be allowed.
At the time of the preparation of each of the above notarial deeds, the defendant served as E-ju stores, and the plaintiff decided to work as a contact loan, and the plaintiff did not work only a day and did not have a leap with the escape, and the plaintiff's obligation is not subject to the extinctive prescription of commercial claims as the obligation to return unjust enrichment due to the fraud of prepaid money.
(b) to induce, induce, mediate, or force, or enforce, for the purpose of making a profit-making.