1. The Defendant’s drafting document against the Plaintiff is based on the notarial deed No. 672 of 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 19, 2015, joint and several sureties in the Plaintiff’s name prepared a loan certificate (No. 2) stating that the Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million from the Defendant.

The "joint debtor" of the above loan certificate includes the name of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's seal is affixed.

B. On November 30, 2015, No. 672 of the No. 2015, D Co., Ltd. signed a notarial deed of a monetary loan loan agreement with the Plaintiff, as the agent of C and the Plaintiff, entrusted the Defendant with the preparation of a notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (No. 6 certificate; hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed of this case”) with the purport that “the Defendant shall set KRW 80 million to C on October 19, 2015 at the due date of payment of 20 million and interest rate of 25% per annum, and the Plaintiff shall jointly and severally guarantee the obligation to the Defendant of the said C, and if the Plaintiff and C fail to perform the said monetary obligation, it shall immediately be deemed that there is no objection even if compulsory execution is performed.”

The power of attorney (No. 5) attached to the notarial deed of this case contains the purport that the plaintiff delegates all the authority to designate D as his agent and commission the preparation of the notarial deed of this case. The name and address of the plaintiff are stated, and the plaintiff's seal is affixed next to the plaintiff's name.

C. On December 29, 2015, the Defendant rendered a compulsory auction ruling on the real estate owned by the Plaintiff as the title of execution on December 29, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 2, 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion does not confer the power of representation to D with respect to the preparation of the notarial deed of this case. Thus, the notarial deed of this case is invalid as it was made upon the commission of a unauthorized representative.

B. The plaintiff alleged by the defendant conferred a power of attorney to commission D to prepare the notarial deed of this case, instead of a power of attorney to commission F to prepare the notarial deed of this case.