1. Certificates drawn up by the Defendant’s notary public against the Plaintiff on October 7, 2015, No. 378, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 23, 2015, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 80,000,00 from the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant loan”). On October 7, 2010 of the same year, the Plaintiff drafted a notarial deed (No. 378, 205, No. 130,000 at face value, issued date, October 7, 2015, and October 22, 2015, stating that a notary public located in the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Tehro 8-ro, Hong Building 4 (Songdong) shall immediately enforce the instant loan in Han River (hereinafter “the instant promissory note”).

B. After that agreement, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to pay interest on the instant loan amount at KRW 6,00,000, and on October 19, 2015, the Plaintiff issued six copies of the cashier’s checks issued by the East Korea Financial Center at the East Korea Financial Center at the Korea Bank (hereinafter “Korea Financial Center”). On October 22, 2015, the Plaintiff issued six copies of the above cashier’s checks to the Defendant as the payment of interest obligations.

In addition, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 80,000,000 to the Defendant through the bank account on November 3, 2015 as the principal debt of the instant loan.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 6, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, all of the underlying obligations of the Promissory Notes were discharged and extinguished.

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the Notarial Deed of Promissory Notes against the Defendant against the Plaintiff should be denied.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the provisional disposition of suspension of compulsory execution by the time the judgment becomes final and conclusive pursuant to Article 47 (1) of the Civil Execution Act.