1. The Plaintiff’s notary public against the Defendant drafted on September 15, 2003 the 21st century’s General Law Office by a notary public against the Defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 15, 2003, at the commission of the plaintiff's mother C (the principal, the plaintiff and D's representative) and the defendant, a notary public prepared a notarial deed of borrowed money with the 2003 deed 2947 at the 21st century's general law office. The purport is that "C borrowed from the defendant on September 15, 2003, and the maturity shall be determined on December 30, 2008, and the plaintiff and D shall stand joint and several surety for the above borrowed money."

B. Meanwhile, on November 15, 2007, the Plaintiff was granted immunity in the Gwangju District Court 2006Da5280, and in the case of application for adjudication of bankruptcy 2006Hadan5175, and the decision became final and conclusive on the 30th of the same month. The list of creditors submitted by the Plaintiff at the time of application for bankruptcy and exemption was not stated in the above list of creditors.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5 and 6

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the above joint and several liability of the Plaintiff’s Defendant (hereinafter “instant obligation”) was exempted from the immunity decision.

In regard to this, the defendant argued that the debt of this case is a claim that the plaintiff did not enter in the list of creditors in bad faith in the bankruptcy and immunity procedure, and thus, it constitutes non-exempt credit. Thus, the defendant asserted that the plaintiff was at the site at the time of the preparation of the above notarial deed. However, the evidence alone is insufficient to acknowledge the above fact, and there is no evidence to support this fact. The above notarial deed also entrusts C with the preparation on behalf of the joint and several sureties such as the plaintiff, etc., ② there is no evidence to prove that the part of the notarial deed (Evidence B) submitted by the defendant was prepared by the plaintiff, ③ there was no evidence to prove that the plaintiff was prepared, ③ there was no evidence to prove that the part of the notarial deed (Evidence B) submitted by the defendant was prepared by the plaintiff, ③ there was a number of years after the preparation of the above notarial deed at