1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff on March 26, 2014, No. 548 of the Daejeon General Law Firm.

Basic Facts

On March 26, 2014, the Daejeon General Law Firm, a notary public, at the commission of the defendant and C, prepared a notarial deed as stated in Paragraph 1 of the Disposition with the defendant as the creditor, C, debtor, and joint and several sureties (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

C The Plaintiff represented the said law firm by submitting a letter of delegation (No. 2, hereinafter referred to as “the letter of delegation of this case”) with the seal affixed by the Plaintiff’s name affixed to the said law firm.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and judgment-related legal principles as to the cause of claim as a whole of the pleadings are acts of litigation against a notary public so that a notarial deed may have executory power as an executory power. Thus, in case where a notarial deed is prepared by commission of an executory representative, it is not effective as an executory power.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da2803 delivered on March 24, 2006). The burden of proving the existence of the right of representation to prepare such a notarial deed is a creditor who asserts its effect, and the establishment of the authenticity of the part directly prepared by a notary public of a notarial deed is presumed, but the fact that it can be acknowledged by the fact is merely a proxy to commission the preparation of a notarial deed, and it does not necessarily mean that the agent has a legitimate right of representation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da18114 Decided June 28, 2002). In addition, the seal imprint and the seal imprint are only one material that can recognize the right of representation, and thus, they do not necessarily have the right of representation to enter into a joint and several surety contract for a money loan or to commission the preparation of a notarial deed for the said contract.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da42195 Decided September 25, 2008). The fact that the Plaintiff issued a certificate of personal seal impression and an identification card to C does not dispute between the parties, and the Plaintiff as a supporting document concerning the right of representation when entrusting C with the preparation of the instant notarial deed.