A. On June 10, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the claim of the check amount under the Jeonju District Court Branch Branch 2014Ga1742, and was sentenced to a full favorable judgment (hereinafter “related judgment”), which held that “the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant the amount of KRW 30,000,000 and the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 5% per annum from February 4, 2014 to May 8, 2014, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “related judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On March 3, 2016, after the judgment of the relevant case became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a written confirmation of guarantee exemption agreement in installments as follows:

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). The Plaintiff confirms that the amount of claims based on the instant judgment regarding the confirmation letter of exemption from obligation in installments is partly paid out of the amount of claims and is exempted from the said claims as follows, and confirms that the agreement becomes void in the event of nonperformance even once.

- Following: 15,00,000 won (i.e., the repayment agreement on March 30, 2016; 2.1,000,000 won on April 20, 2016; three times (3: 1,000,000 won on May 20, 2016; 4.6. 1,000,000 won on June 20, 2016; 5,000 won on July 20, 2016; 6. 1,50,000 won on August 20, 2016; 1,50,000 won on August 20, 2016; 1,50,000 won on September 20, 2016;

C. The Plaintiff paid each amount to the Defendant as indicated in the attached Form.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to modify the amount of claims ordered in the relevant judgment in the instant case. Since the Plaintiff fully paid KRW 15,00,000 as stipulated in the instant agreement to the Defendant, the Plaintiff did not bear any obligation pursuant to the relevant judgment, and accordingly, compulsory execution based on the Defendant’s relevant judgment against the Plaintiff should be denied.