A. On June 1, 2015, Busan District Court Decision 2014Ga 89559, Busan District Court decided to recommend settlement that “the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 30,000,000 to the Defendant on a three-time basis, which shall be paid in installments,” and the said decision became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On November 8, 2018, the Defendant drafted a written agreement containing the purport that “the Defendant waives its claim against the Plaintiff based on the decision on recommending reconciliation” between C and C, the Plaintiff’s spouse.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. On November 8, 2018, the Defendant: (a) through the preparation of the self-agreement, renounced the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff based on the recommendation of reconciliation or expressed an intention to exempt the Plaintiff’s obligation; and (b) in light of the relationship with the Plaintiff C, the said declaration of intent became effective after reaching the Plaintiff around that time.

Since it is reasonable to see that the defendant's claim against the plaintiff based on the defendant's recommendation for reconciliation was extinguished.

B. According to the self-agreement on November 8, 2018, the Defendant paid KRW 26,00,000 to the Defendant. Since C did not implement the agreement, the agreement on November 8, 2018 became null and void. Accordingly, the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff based on the Defendant’s recommendation on reconciliation was restored.

The argument is asserted.

However, C breached its obligation by mutual agreement on November 8, 2018

such agreement becomes null and void or a claim based on the defendant's recommendation for reconciliation has been restored.

Since there is no reason to view it, the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is justified and accepted.