1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that there is no obligation based on the notarial deed of this case or null and void for the following reasons.

1) The instant notarial deed was merely prepared by the Defendant for the purpose of school submission on the grounds that it is necessary for the Plaintiff’s Plaintiff’s East D and his father’s U.S. F University admission. Moreover, the Defendant already paid 32 million won of the expenses that the Defendant requested for the said admission. Therefore, there is no obligation based on the instant notarial deed. As such, the instant notarial deed is not prepared as a genuine loan for consumption, but merely merely prepared for the purpose of school submission, and thus, it is invalid as it constitutes a false declaration of intention under Article 107 of the Civil Act or a false declaration of intention under Article 108 of the Civil Act.

3) In fact, even though school expenses of Funiversity are only seven million won per student, the defendant had the plaintiff prepare the notarial deed of this case which is composed of 32 million won by deceiving or omitting the plaintiff in error. The plaintiff revoked his/her declaration of intention by deception or mistake pursuant to Articles 109 and 110 of the Civil Act. (4) Even if the defendant received 33 million won from the plaintiff, he/she again received 32 million won as school expenses from the plaintiff and started compulsory execution against the plaintiff's property, it again received 32 million won as a result of the notarial deed of this case and started compulsory execution against the plaintiff's property. Such compulsory execution constitutes abuse of rights.

2. Determination

A. Contrary to the allegations by the Plaintiff related to facts, the Plaintiff paid KRW 29 million (all expenses related to D’s degree) and KRW 32 million (all expenses related to E’s degree) to the Defendant in return for allowing his/her birth D and E to obtain a doctorate and bachelor’s degree from the U.S. F.C. without completing the genuine curriculum necessary for the conferment of a degree. Accordingly, the Plaintiff paid KRW 29 million to the Defendant during the period from April 13, 2016 to May 10, 2016, but the Defendant paid KRW 29 million related expenses related to D’s degree. However, the Plaintiff paid KRW 32 million related expenses related to E.