beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s notary public C’s repayment contract No. 105 of the 2015 deed drawn up by the Defendant on January 21, 2015.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Article 105 of the 2015 Deed prepared by the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and D on January 21, 2015, which was signed by a notary public C on December 20, 2015, was drafted a debt repayment contract notarial deed (hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed of this case”) stating that “The debtor D bears the obligation of KRW 60 million from the Defendant on December 20, 2014, and shall be repaid in twenty installments each month from December 20, 2014 to July 20, 2016. The Plaintiff as a joint and several surety guarantees the obligor D’s obligation, and if the debtor and the joint and several surety fail to perform their obligation under this contract, they are aware that there is no objection even if they are subject to compulsory execution.”
B. The notarial deed of this case was prepared by the commission of D on behalf of the Plaintiff, and the notarial deed of this case contains a statement that “the power of representation on commission is recognized by the principal’s power of attorney and a certificate of personal seal impression.”
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Plaintiff D’s assertion 1) Without obtaining any authority from the Plaintiff, the proxy form in the Plaintiff’s name was forged and obtained at will, and submitted a certificate of personal seal impression to a notary public and entrusted the preparation of the instant notarial deed. As such, the part of the instant notarial deed that the Plaintiff guaranteed the Plaintiff’s debt is invalid. Therefore, the Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff should not be permitted. 2) The Defendant’s right to entrust Defendant D with the preparation of the instant notarial deed on behalf of the Plaintiff, and even if not, in light of all circumstances including the fact that the money borrowed by the Plaintiff’s spouse was used as funds necessary for the Plaintiff’s business or credit card payment, the act of entrusting D’s preparation of the instant notarial deed is within the scope of the ordinary notarial deed’s authority.
As such, the authentication of this case is based on the Notarial Deed.