1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On October 13, 2015, the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the cause of the claim entered into a monetary loan agreement with the content that the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 50 million from the Defendant at interest rate of 20% per annum (payment on October 13, 2016), and on October 13, 2016, set up an authentic deed of a monetary loan agreement with C office of notary public No. 1503 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

However, the amount actually borrowed by the Plaintiff from the Defendant was KRW 45,760,000 on October 13, 2015, and KRW 45,760,000 on November 16, 2015, and KRW 4,000 on December 13, 2015, and KRW 13,00 on January 13, 2016, including KRW 2,760,00 on January 13, 2016.

In addition, unlike the statement in the monetary loan contract, the plaintiff paid the principal and interest from time to time, and the total amount of repayment has reached KRW 40,188,000 so far.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the above notarial deed should not be allowed.

2. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the Plaintiff and the Defendant written the instant Notarial Deed on October 13, 2015, and the Defendant paid KRW 45,760,000 to the Defendant from October 13, 2015 to July 13, 2016, the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 40,000 to the Plaintiff, including KRW 16,00,00 on November 16, 2015, KRW 16,00 on December 13, 2015, KRW 45,760,000 on December 13, 2015, and KRW 2,760,000 on January 13, 2016, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 40,18,000 to the Defendant from October 13, 2015 to July 13, 2016.

However, in light of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as a whole by adding up the contents of evidence Nos. 1 through 4 in each statement of evidence Nos. 1 to the whole purport of the pleadings, the plaintiff's seek to exclude the whole executory power over compulsory execution based on the

① In borrowing KRW 50 million from the Defendant, the Plaintiff appears to have paid interest of KRW 1 million each month.

② Although the instant notarial deed contains a loan of KRW 50 million, the Defendant’s payment of the loan to the Plaintiff was 45,760,000 due to the fact that the Defendant paid the loan to the Plaintiff in installments by deducting interest.

③ The Plaintiff operated a dan with the trade name “D”, and the Defendant from April 2015 to April 2016.