1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A notary public belonging to the Busan District Public Prosecutor's Office D shall prepare a notarial deed on May 11, 2012 as Cjoint Law Office D, No. 635, 2012. The main content is that E shall borrow 35 million won from the defendant, but the principal shall be 1.5 million won on the 15th day of each month from July 15, 2012 to May 15, 2014; and the interest rate shall be 60,000 won on June 15, 2014; the Plaintiff and F shall be 6% per annum; the above notarial deed was a loan for consumption, and if the debtor and joint guarantor fail to perform a monetary obligation under the above contract, there is no dispute between the parties concerned.

The Plaintiff asserts that, as the actual obligor under the above loan for consumption is F, the Plaintiff’s husband, and around April 28, 2015, there was an agreement between the Defendant and F to nullify the above notarial deed as to the modification of the terms of the above contract, and therefore, compulsory execution based on the above notarial deed should be denied.

According to Gap evidence No. 1, the defendant and F are acknowledged to have prepared a monetary loan agreement between the defendant and F to lend the amount of 44 million won to F, but it is insufficient to recognize that the above facts alone are sufficient to acknowledge that there was an agreement between the above persons to invalidate the above notarial deed. The same applies to considering the substance of Gap evidence No. 2, which is the plaintiff's written assertion, added to the plaintiff's evidence No. 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.