노임등
1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. The following facts are apparent to be recorded:
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant as the Jeonju District Court 2017Kadan634, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on May 1, 2018.
B. On November 27, 2018, which was initiated by a commissioned judge, the Plaintiff appealed to the judgment of the first instance court as the Jeonju District Court 2018Na3819. On November 27, 2018, the conciliation was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the following content of the conciliation protocol (hereinafter “quasi-examination protocol”).
1. The defendant shall pay 7 million won to the plaintiff up to April 30, 2019. If the defendant fails to pay the above amount by the payment date, the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the day after the date of payment to the day of full payment shall be paid.
2. The plaintiff and the defendant shall withdraw their respective appeals with respect to the cases of Jeonju District Court 2018Na4102 (principal lawsuit) and 4119 (Counterclaim).
3. The plaintiff and the defendant shall not raise civil or criminal questions on all names, such as wages, retirement allowances, various allowances, etc. for the period of service of the plaintiff company in the future, and shall not file a civil or criminal complaint with each other against administrative agencies. If there are existing cases of accusation, etc., they shall submit a written withdrawal immediately.
4. By no later than December 15, 2018, the Defendant shall submit to the Jung-Eup Employment Welfare Plus Center a certificate of severance from employment caused by expiration of the term of office of the Plaintiff.
5. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.
6. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne individually by each party.
2. The conciliation procedure for the conciliation protocol subject to quasi-examination as to the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was initiated by the Plaintiff to the power of a commissioned judge, and the commissioned judge did not consent to the conciliation of the case at the Jeonju District Court 2018Na4102, and 4119 (Counterclaim) as stated in paragraph (2) of the above conciliation protocol.