A. On February 3, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into the agreement with the Defendant to enter into a membership agreement with the Saritius operated by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant golf club”) (hereinafter “instant membership agreement”), and paid KRW 40,000,000,000,000 as the membership fee to the Defendant on April 10, 2008. On June 30, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 90,000,000,000, in order to convert the name into the feld members of the instant golf club on June 10, 2009. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 20683, Apr. 30, 2008; Presidential Decree No. 2000, Jun. 10, 2009>

B. Article 10 of the rules of the instant golf course provides that “The admission fee shall be paid as a membership deposit to the company, and only the principal shall be refunded within 60 days from the date of request for withdrawal after deposit for five years from the date of regular opening of the golf course.”

C. On September 17, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant demanding the return of the membership fee (2012Ahap357) with this court. On December 3, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant as follows (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and withdrawn the said lawsuit on December 25, 2012.

P. P.C.

1. The Plaintiff’s claim for the return of membership fees (case number: 2012 Gohap357) filed with the Daegu District Court’s gender support is to be withdrawn immediately after the completion of this confirmation.

2. On June 20, 2014, which is the time for the return of admission fees specified in a membership agreement (Article 3), the golf course shall be returned at the request of the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-4, Eul evidence 1, the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to return the Plaintiff’s membership fee paid upon the Plaintiff’s request for the return of the Plaintiff’s membership fee upon the arrival of June 20, 2014 according to the agreement of this case, and the record stating that the duplicate of the complaint of this case was served on the Defendant on June 9, 2014.