(영문) 수원지방법원 2020.02.05 2019나71394

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) 수원지방법원 2020.02.05 2019나71394

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. The notarial deed No. 317 of February 10, 2012 prepared by the Plaintiff’s notary public on February 10, 2012 (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) is invalid since it is a notarial deed prepared on behalf of the Plaintiff, notwithstanding the absence of authority to represent the Plaintiff in order to reach an agreement with the Defendant, the victim of the said criminal case, using a certificate of personal seal impression issued by the Plaintiff’s mother D under the pretext of preparing a criminal application for the criminal case for E for the outside of the Plaintiff, etc.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case is illegal, and compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case should not be permitted.

B. As long as the Plaintiff’s seal is affixed on the power of attorney that delegates the preparation of the instant notarial deed and the instant notarial deed to D (hereinafter “the instant power of attorney”), the authenticity of the seal is presumed to have been established and accordingly the authenticity of the document is presumed to have been established.

Since the plaintiff, who made a plea that the seal was stolen, failed to prove that the seal was stolen, the authenticity of the letter of delegation in this case and the notarial deed is presumed to have been established, and the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

2. Determination

A. Since the indication of the recognition and recognition of execution that the judgment on the cause of the claim may have an executory power as an executory power is a procedural act against a notary public, in case where a notarial deed is prepared by the commission of an unauthorized representative, it is not effective as an executory power, and the burden of proof as to the existence of an executory power to prepare such notarial deed is the creditor

Although the authenticity of the portion directly prepared by a notary public of a notarial deed is presumed to be established, the facts which can be recognized by it are merely that the agent has entrusted the preparation of a notarial deed, and it is not naturally admitted that the agent has legitimate power of attorney.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da18114 delivered on June 28, 2002.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2020.02.05 2019나71394

-전주지방법원 2016.11.04 2015나8851

-춘천지방법원원주지원 2015.10.27 2015가단30526

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.01.10 2017가단5142588

-대전지방법원 2015.09.23 2015가합179