beta
Text
The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is a monetary loan agreement No. 1139 of 2017.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 24, 2017 between the Defendant, B (the mother of the Plaintiff), and the Plaintiff, a notary public drafted a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement between the Defendant, B (the Plaintiff’s mother), stating that “B, on July 24, 2017, borrowed KRW 3,600,000 from the Defendant on July 24, 2017, at the rate of 24% per annum, and on August 16, 2017, the due date for repayment, 2017.” The Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable for the said debt to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff is aware that there is no objection even if compulsory execution was conducted immediately.”
B. On May 17, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant as Busan District Court Branch Branch of the Busan District Court 2018Kadan5340, but the instant case was deemed to have been withdrawn on March 20, 2019 due to the absence of the two parties on three occasions.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the amount indicated by adding 20% of the borrowed amount to B, who is a person operating an illegal high interest bond business, and KRW 3,600,000 on the Notarial Deed of this case, to KRW 3,000,000 from the Defendant on July 24, 2017.
B was actually paid only KRW 2,700,000 after deducting the aforementioned KRW 300,000 from the Defendant’s 3,000,000, and as such, the principal of the loan is KRW 2,700,000.
In addition, the Plaintiff and B shall repay the principal and interest of the loan to the Defendant as follows. The Defendant’s loan claims remain at the rate of 281,577 won as principal and 25% per annum from March 1, 2018 to the date of full payment. As such, the portion exceeding the above principal and interest of the compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed shall be dismissed.
3. Determination
A. As long as a disposal document with respect to the principal of a loan is recognized as the authenticity, the court shall state it in the absence of clear and acceptable counter-proof evidence to deny the contents of the loan.