2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the defendant.

A. On April 21, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking a judgment on revocation of a fraudulent act against the Defendant, asserting that the agreement on the division of inherited property concluded on April 21, 2018 between the Defendant and C with respect to shares in 2/13 of the real estate stated in the separate sheet, would constitute a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, who is a creditor of C (hereinafter “the case subject to quasi-examination”).

B. A case subject to quasi-examination was referred to conciliation, and on October 13:30, 2019, the Plaintiff’s manager and C, the Defendant’s attorney and the Intervenor, are present at the date of conciliation opened in the court (hereinafter “instant date of conciliation”) under Article 15 of the Jung-gu District Court Decision No. 15 (hereinafter “instant date of conciliation”) and the conciliation clause as follows:

1. The Defendant shall pay 17,00,000 won to the Plaintiff in 17 installments, and pay 1,000,000 won to the end of each month from November 2019 to March 2021. If the Defendant delays the payment of the above money twice or more (2,00,000 won) on the above payment date, the Defendant shall lose the benefit of the deadline and pay the unpaid amount to the Plaintiff in lump sum, and the unpaid amount shall be paid by adding the delay damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the day after the date of loss of the due date to the day of full payment.

2. If the Defendant fully pays the amount stated in paragraph 1 to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff waives all of the claims for loans held by the Intervenor C to the Intervenor, and no longer seek performance of the above loans to the Intervenor C.

3. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

4. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne respectively;

A quasi-examination protocol has been established and has been prepared.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy Facts, entry Eul's evidence 1, significant facts in this court, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The defendant's assertion

A. The conciliation date of this case was carried out in the atmosphere room, not in the court stated in the quasi-Review Protocol, and was non-public.