A notary public of the defendant against the plaintiff is based on the bill No. 1380 of C2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On December 20, 2017, a notary public signed D as the Plaintiff’s agent and E respectively as the Defendant’s agent, and issued a promissory note No. 1380 of the 2017 deed (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) in C, which is the date of payment, December 20, 2017, the date of publication, and the date of payment, December 20, 2017.

B. Based on the instant notarial deed, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff’s issuance of a seizure and collection order against the Plaintiff’s account of the F Co., Ltd., and on November 22, 2018, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order as to the Plaintiff’s claim and collection order.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 4 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant cannot assert as a lawsuit of objection the establishment procedure of the Notarial Deed of this case, the non-existence or invalidation of the title of execution, or the uncertainty of the content of the title of execution. Since the defendant already received a seizure and collection order on the basis of the Notarial Deed of this case, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

In the case of a notarial deed, the reason for failure, invalidation, etc. which occurred prior to the preparation of the notarial deed may be asserted in a lawsuit of demurrer against the notarial deed (Articles 59(3) and 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act), and in the case where the creditor has already satisfied due to the termination of a group of compulsory execution based on the executive titles, there is no benefit of lawsuit seeking the denial of compulsory execution by filing a lawsuit of objection (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da52489, Apr. 25, 1997). The evidence presented to this court alone cannot be recognized that compulsory execution based on the notarial deed of this case has been completed, and therefore the defendant's defense prior to the merits is groundless.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The plaintiff 1 did not delegate the preparation of the notarial deed of this case to D, and there is no ground claim in the notarial deed of this case.