A notary public of the defendant against the plaintiff is a monetary loan contract No. 876 of the 2011 Document No. C prepared by the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 23, 2011, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the obligor (the Plaintiff) set KRW 46,367,40 from the obligee (the Defendant) as maturity date on September 30, 201, and on September 30, 2011, a notary public who borrowed KRW 46,367,40 from the obligee (the Plaintiff) as interest rate of 30% per annum, drafted a notarial deed of monetary loan contract No. 876 of the document prepared by C (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”).

B. On September 27, 2010, the Plaintiff opened a business with trade, construction materials, stone, straws, etc. as “D” and closed the business on October 19, 201.

C. On October 10, 2007, the Defendant was appointed as a director of Company E (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) for the business of manufacturing stone and the wholesale and retail business of stone, etc. on October 10, 201, and was a representative director on October 10, 2010. However, Nonparty Company closed its business on December 31, 2015.

At the time of the preparation of the instant authentic deed, the Plaintiff brought stone into China and supplied it to the non-party company.

E. On February 20, 2020, the Defendant applied for a collection order for the seizure and collection order of the instant claim (hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”) with the title of execution of the Notarial Deed as the Seoul Western District Court 2020 Taga907, and received the decision of acceptance on February 24, 2020.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1 (a certified copy of notarial deed, the plaintiff's assertion that this document was prepared by the defendant's intimidation, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it), Gap evidence No. 3, 6, Gap evidence No. 7-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 3-1, 3-3, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant notarial deed was issued and delivered in order to secure the domestic entry of the building stones ordered in the process of importing the building stones with the Defendant’s L/C establishment and the Defendant’s pre-paid payment to the Chinese stone company. Since then, the Plaintiff completed the supply of all the building stones ordered by the Defendant, and completed the Defendant’s performance of the duty of supplying building stones guaranteed by the instant notarial deed.

(b).