(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2019.10.15 2019가단1672

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) 서울동부지방법원 2019.10.15 2019가단1672

청구이의

Text

1. The defendant's notary public against the plaintiff is on the notarial deed of promissory note No. 178 of September 19, 2008, No. 178 of 2008.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A Promissory Notes (hereinafter “instant Promissory Notes”) was drawn up on May 2, 2008, including the Plaintiff, the Defendant, the date of issuance, KRW 30 million, and KRW 30 million at sight of the due date. On September 19, 2008, a notary public drafted a notarial deed to accept the Plaintiff’s compulsory execution (hereinafter “instant notarial deed”) in cases where the payment of the Promissory Notes is delayed due to No. 178, 2008, No. C. 2008.

B. The notarial deed of this case states that the defendant entrusted the preparation of the notarial deed as the plaintiff's agent, and its power of representation is recognized by the power of attorney attached to the plaintiff's certificate of personal

C. The Defendant seized and collected the Plaintiff’s claim for return of the lease deposit against Nonparty D based on the instant notarial deed as Seoul Eastern District Court 2018TTTT14384, and the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking non-performance of compulsory execution based on the instant notarial deed.

No complaint was filed against the forgery of the power of attorney in the name of the Plaintiff attached to the Promissory Notes or the Notarial Deed of this case, and the Defendant is based on the Notarial Deed of this case.

No other petition shall be filed for compulsory execution except for compulsory execution stated in the paragraph.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, Eul 7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant had the seal affixed to the Promissory Notes in his own discretion, and the power of attorney on the preparation of the Notarial Notes was forged, and further, the extinctive prescription of the Promissory Notes has expired.

As to this, the defendant asserts that the Promissory Notes and Notarial Deed were prepared in accordance with the due process, and that there was late application for compulsory execution due to the reasons such as the plaintiff's impossibility of delivery.

3. Determination

A. The defendant's discretion.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2015.06.18 2014가단539320

-수원지방법원성남지원 2016.08.26 2016가단2689

-광주지방법원 2016.01.29 2015가합3237

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.01.24 2017가단15744

-서울고등법원 2016.04.22 2015나2055784