beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff is on the notarial deed of Promissory Notes No. 476 of the 2013 Joint Law Office.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On October 14, 2013, the Defendant, as an agent of the Plaintiff, issued, as well as issuer D, Plaintiff and F, face value of KRW 500,00,000, issue date, October 14, 2013, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and one Promissory Notes against the Defendant (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) to the effect that “if the payment of the instant Promissory Notes is delayed, it shall be immediately subject to compulsory execution” was commissioned to prepare a notarial deed of promissory Notes No. 476 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”), No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 2013, No. 1014, No. 303, Dec. 14, 2013.
B. At the time of commissioning the preparation of the notarial deed of this case, the Defendant submitted to the above legal office a letter of delegation under the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “the letter of delegation of this case”) and a certificate of personal seal impression of the Plaintiff, stating that “the Defendant shall delegate all the authority regarding the commission of the notarial deed of this case to the Defendant.”
C. Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant filed an application for the seizure and collection order of KRW 50,027,125, among the deposit claims against each of the above financial institutions by designating the debtor as the Plaintiff, the garnishee as the Plaintiff, and the garnishee as G and H, etc., as the Plaintiff had against each of the above financial institutions, as the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch 2019TTT 56198, and the said court rendered a decision to the same effect as the above application on June 4, 2019.
On June 25, 2019, G Co., Ltd. received the above decision and paid KRW 20,360,809 to the Plaintiff’s account in the Plaintiff’s name, and H paid KRW 22,109,245 to the Defendant from the account in the Plaintiff’s name on June 26, 2019.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul's statements in subparagraphs 4 and 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Judgment on the part of the claim objection is made by the parties.