1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

The plaintiff asserts that the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 39,427,112 won and damages for delay according to the payment order in this case and the notary public in accordance with the notarial deed No. 467 of 2001 and Cjoint Law Office No. 2050 of 2001.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the payment order of this case and each of the notarial deeds of this case are prepared without the consent of the defendant, and thus, they are null and void as they fall under the unauthorized representation, and furthermore, as the ten-year extinctive prescription has expired, compulsory execution based on the above payment order and notarial deed should be rejected

Judgment

A. First, we examine whether the payment order of this case and each of the notarial deeds of this case are invalid.

According to Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff filed an application for payment order against the defendant, etc. based on the loan certificate with the Jeju District Court No. 2002 tea386, and the above order becomes final and conclusive on April 16, 2002 against the defendant.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 30 million to E on April 9, 2001. The above loan certificate (Evidence No. 6; hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”) states that the Defendant’s wife and the Defendant stand joint and several sureties with respect to the above loan obligation. The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 20 million to D on August 3, 2001 as the due date for payment on September 3, 2001. The notary public drafted No. 467 of the No. 2001 as joint and several notarial deed (Evidence No. 7) stating that the Defendant stated as joint and several notarial deed No. 30,000,000 as D on November 13, 201, and the above notarial deed No. 3050,000 as D on November 3, 2001.