1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. With respect to cases of application for the suspension of compulsory execution by this Court, April 18, 2018.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 8, 2014, the Plaintiff prepared and delivered to the Defendant a notarized deed of money loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed 1”) with a notary public as to KRW 50,00,000 on October 20, 2014 on the date of repayment as to the loan amount of KRW 50,000,000 from a law firm C with a deed 2014 and 914, and at the rate of interest rate of 20% per annum, and at the rate of delay damages rate of 25% per annum.

On October 20, 2014, the Plaintiff prepared and delivered to the Defendant an authentic deed of a monetary loan for consumption (hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed 2”) with respect to KRW 20,000,000,000 from a law firm as a deed No. 2014 and 915 on October 20, 2014, with respect to the loan amount of KRW 20,000 per annum, interest rate of 20% per annum, and interest rate of delay damages rate of KRW 25% per annum, and on December 18, 2014, a notary public prepared and delivered to the Defendant an authentic deed of a loan for consumption (hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed 3”) with respect to KRW 46,00,00 with respect to the total amount of KRW 46,00 which the Plaintiff is a borrower or a joint guarantor and is liable for the payment to the Defendant from a law firm C through a law firm C to December 1099, 2014.

B. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the Defendant, and the Plaintiff asserted that, as the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the Seoul Central District Court 2016Kadan21559, the first or third notarial deeds were prepared by the Defendant’s deceptive scheme, and the Plaintiff did not delegate his authority to prepare each notarial deed to the agent D, each of the above notarial deeds was forged, and since all of the borrowed money stated in each notarial deed was repaid, compulsory execution based on each of the notarial deeds of this case should be denied.

On July 21, 2017, there is no evidence to prove that each notarial deed was prepared or forged without the power of representation. ② Since the principal and interest of the obligation stated in the notarial deed was fully repaid, compulsory execution based thereon shall be denied, and ③ the defendant's Seoul Southern District Court among the obligations stated in the notarial deed 3rd.