1. Promissory notes with executory power of No. 1344, 2004 by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff.

1. The facts of the basis are as follows: on June 15, 2004, the Defendant: (a) prepared a notarial deed with the Plaintiff on June 15, 2004 on the face value of KRW 3570,050,000 issued by the Plaintiff to the Defendant; and (b) received a seizure and collection order on June 25, 2004 on a promissory note (the stipulation that interest shall be paid at 20% per annum from the date following the date of issuance) with respect to the promissory note (the stipulation that interest shall be paid at 20% per annum) issued by the Plaintiff; and (c) requested a seizure and collection order

(Based on recognition), Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, shall be specified in the Gwangju District Court 2004TT 4504.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The purport of the plaintiff's assertion is 85 million won for the defendant's obligation to be borne by the plaintiff, but the plaintiff and the defendant made up for the defendant to recover the amount of the claim of this case more rapidly than other creditors. Of the amount of the claim stated in the above notarial deed, the part in excess of the actual amount of the claim is null and void as a false declaration of agreement, and since the above 85 million won obligation is fully repaid, compulsory execution with the execution title of the above notarial deed should be denied.

B. Determination 1) The following circumstances are revealed by comprehensively taking account of the descriptions in subparagraph 2-1 through 3 of the evidence Nos. 2-3 and the overall purport of the pleadings. In other words, the Defendant also guaranteed the Plaintiff’s obligation of KRW 20 million on December 7, 2000 borrowed from the Plaintiff, May 23, 2001, KRW 200 million on the date, and KRW 15 million on May 23, 2001. The Defendant asserted that the sum of the amount directly lent to the Plaintiff and the amount of the above joint and several debt, and the amount of the above credit, etc., the Defendant’s evidence is proved as evidence that the Plaintiff made up the Notarial Deed. 85 million out of the face value stated in the above Notarial Deed (the Plaintiff paid only KRW 20,000 on or around 206).