beta
Text
1. A notarized bill No. 284 against the Defendant’s Plaintiff on the No. 284 of the No. 2014.
Reasons
1. On March 21, 2014, with respect to promissory notes, the issue date of which was payable at sight (hereinafter “instant promissory notes”) as to the issuer, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, the face value of which was KRW 20,000,000, and the issue date of which was March 21, 2014, a notarial deed was drawn up on June 13, 2014 by the commission of the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s agent, as the No. 284, a notary public’s law firm
(hereinafter referred to as “notarial deed of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence No. 4, and purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff did not have prepared the Promissory Notes, and there is no delegation of authority to anyone with respect to the preparation of the Notarial Deed of this case. Therefore, the Notarial Deed of this case is null and void. 2) The Defendant’s assertion delegated C with respect to the issuance of the Promissory Notes and the preparation of the Notarial Deed of this case, and C prepared the Notarial Deed of this case within its authority. Thus, the Notarial Deed of this case was effective.
B. 1) The seal imprint design and the seal imprint certificate are merely one material that can recognize the right of representation, and therefore, they do not necessarily mean that the person who received the seal imprint design and the seal imprint certificate enter into a contract or commission the preparation of a notarial deed on the above contract is not recognized, and the defendant who asserts the effect of the right of representation (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da42195, Sept. 25, 2008). 2) In this regard, it is insufficient to recognize that the No. 4 and the evidence submitted by the defendant alone the fact that the notarial deed of this case was prepared by C with the certificate of this case granted the right of representation from the plaintiff, and there is no other evidence that can be otherwise recognized.
3. Rather, the following facts are comprehensively taken into account the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 through 9 and the purport of the whole pleadings.