1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff was a law firm No. 784, and No. 786, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. From March 13, 2013 to September 23, 2013, the Defendant wired KRW 50,000,000 to the deposit account in the name of D or C, a corporation operated by the Plaintiff’s father C, for three occasions.

B. A and the Defendant, a notary public representing the Plaintiff on August 28, 2013, issued a promissory note No. 784 with respect to one promissory note No. 1, which was named as “the issuer, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, the face value of 50,000,000,000, and the date of issuance, August 27, 2013, and the due date of payment, May 31, 2014, and the Seoul Metropolitan Government at the place of payment at the place of payment at the place of issuance,” respectively, was written by the issuer, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant, and the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff on August 28, 2013. The notarial deed as to one promissory note No. 786, “each of the instant promissory note No. 30,000, the face value of the Plaintiff, and the date of issuance, August 27, 2013; and the place of payment at the place of payment at the place of issuance.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 (including those with additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Although the Plaintiff did not grant the right of representation for preparation to C, it is not effective that C voluntarily entrusted the preparation of the instant notarial deed in the future of the Plaintiff, even if it did not grant it to C.

In addition, the notarial deed of this case is prepared in collusion with the defendant in order for C to show to investors.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case should not be permitted.

B. The notarial deed of this case was made by C’s commission granted the power of representation from the plaintiff, and is valid as it was made to secure 100,000,000 won loaned by the defendant to his father C.

3. The indication of recognition and recognition of execution that a judgment notarial deed allows a person to have executory power as an executory title is an act of litigation against a notary public, so a notarial deed is prepared by a commission of an unauthorized representative.