1. Promissory notes No. 449 dated March 8, 2003, dated March 8, 2003 by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 8, 2003, the Plaintiff issued a promissory note in the face value of KRW 50 million with the Defendant as the addressee, March 30, 2006, the issue date, the place of issue, the place of payment, and the place of payment, which are all known-si (hereinafter “instant promissory note”), and on the same day, a notary public made and issued a notarial deed as to the said promissory note (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) with the Defendant No. 449 of C law Office 2003.

B. On June 9, 2014, based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Daesung Development Co., Ltd. based on Suwon District Court Decision 2014TTA, 2014TA, and received a seizure and collection order (hereinafter “instant collection order”) from the above court on June 11, 2014. The instant collection order was served on Daesung Development Co., Ltd., a garnishee on June 13, 2014.

Grounds for recognition: A1-3

2. Determination

(a) The Promissory Notes cannot be deemed as “bonds established by the same effect as the judgment” on the ground that they are notarized in the Promissory Notes, and this Promissory Notes cannot be deemed as having suffered the extinctive prescription of 10 years as claims under Article 165(2) of the Civil Act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da169 delivered on April 14, 1992). In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s claim for promissory notes against the Plaintiff, who is the issuer of the Promissory Notes in this case, was terminated on March 30, 2009 after three years from March 30, 2006, which was the due date.

I would like to say.

(Articles 78(1), 77(1)(8), and 70(1)(b) of the Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes Act.

The judgment of the defendant on the defendant's assertion is that the defendant lent KRW 50 million to the plaintiff on August 26, 1997, and the plaintiff failed to repay the principal and interest of the above loan after August 25, 1998 and made the notarial deed of this case to be prepared. The notarial deed of this case is not a promissory note of this case, but a notarial deed of this case.