beta
Text
1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is based on the No. 418 of 2014 No. 418 of No. 191.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 29, 2014, a notary public, at the commission of the Plaintiff and the Defendant, drafted a notarial deed under a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) of No. 418 of 2014, stating that “The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 25,00,000 from the Defendant on May 29, 2014 at the rate of June 5, 2014, at the rate of 10% per annum, and at the rate of delay damages, at the rate of 30% per annum, and if the Defendant fails to repay the above loan obligation, he/she has no objection even if he/she is immediately subject to compulsory execution.”
B. On December 10, 2014, at the office of notary public C and the Plaintiff’s commission, the notarial deed of a monetary loan agreement (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) No. 1806 of 2014, stating that “The Plaintiff shall have a KRW 25,00,000 from D on December 10, 2014 to December 10, 2014, with the due date set at 25,000 per annum 25,000,00,000, and borrowed from D on December 10, 2019, with the due date set at 25% per annum, and if D does not immediately perform the above loan obligation, the notarial deed of this case (hereinafter “notarial deed No. 2”) was re-established and delivered to the Plaintiff as the original copy of the notarial deed of this case.”
C. Meanwhile, the Jeju District Court issued an order of seizure and assignment on August 3, 2015, based on the Defendant’s claim amounting to KRW 28,265,458, based on an executory exemplification of the No. 1 of the instant case, for which the Plaintiff filed an application for seizure and assignment order on the Plaintiff’s claim against the Nonghyup Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (2015TT4283).
【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap’s evidence 1, Gap’s evidence 2-1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff and the Defendant exempt the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s principal and interest of KRW 25,000,000 based on the No. 1 No. 1 No. 1 No. 1 notarial deed on or around December 10, 2014, and instead, as to D, the Defendant’s punishment.