(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.10.28 2015나1969 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 광주지방법원 2015.10.28 2015나1969

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2.To prepare C by notary public belonging to the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office until this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a father and wife of D.

B. A notary public belonging to the Gwangju District Public Prosecutor’s Office on April 13, 2012 at the request of D shall borrow KRW 50,000,000 from the defendant on April 12, 2012 at the rate of 30% per annum (payment on July 11, 2012) and interest rate (payment on July 11, 2012), and the plaintiff shall stand joint and several surety obligations of the above borrowed money. D and the plaintiff shall recognize that they have no objection even if they are subject to compulsory execution, and the above notarial deed shall state that D shall request the preparation of the said notarial deed as the agent of the debtor and joint and several surety and the creditor’s agent.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that since the plaintiff did not delegate D the authority to entrust D with the preparation of the notarial deed of this case, compulsory execution based on the above notarial deed should be denied.

In this regard, the defendant asserted that since the plaintiff delegated D the authority to request the preparation of the above notarial deed to D in advance or confirmed it later, it cannot respond to the plaintiff's request.

B. 1) Determination 1) The indication of recognition of execution that the plaintiff has delegated D with the authority to request the preparation of the notarial deed of this case) is an act against a notary public as a title of debt, so if a notarial deed has been prepared by a commission of an unauthorized representative, it is not effective as a title of debt, and the burden of proof as to the existence of power to prepare the notarial deed is not effective as a title of debt, and there is a creditor who asserts its effect, and the fact that the notarial deed is presumed to have been authentic as a part of the notarial deed's direct preparation, but it can be acknowledged by that agent is a legitimate power of attorney.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.03.04 2015가단211219

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.10 2017가단5142588

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2015.10.27 2015가단30526

-대전지방법원 2015.09.23 2015가합179

-수원지방법원 2020.02.05 2019나71394