A. On July 3, 2003, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff as a guarantor lent KRW 18 million to C, but failed to receive the refund, and filed a claim against the Plaintiff as the principal obligor C and the joint guarantor for payment of the above loan amounting to KRW 18 million and the damages for delay thereof, which are the court 2004Ga78356, and on August 19, 2004 in the above lawsuit, a voluntary mediation (hereinafter “instant mediation”) was established that “The Plaintiff and C shall jointly and severally pay the Defendant KRW 18 million, but the said money shall be paid in installments to the Defendant on the last day of each month from October 2004 to July 10, 2005.”

B. In accordance with the instant protocol, the Defendant: (a) executed a seizure of corporeal movables owned C (U.S. District Court 2012No. 146); and (b) on May 21, 2012, the Defendant agreed with C on May 21, 2012 regarding the claims under the instant protocol of mediation (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

In case number 2012.146.2, the creditor B does not ask the debtor C for civil and criminal liability for any reason.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant and C, the principal obligor, agreed to exempt C’s obligation under the instant conciliation protocol, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against the joint guarantor, was extinguished due to appendant nature. Therefore, compulsory execution under the instant conciliation protocol ought to be denied. 2) The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant received part of the claim under the instant conciliation protocol from C to May 21, 2012, and withdrawn the main seizure of C’s corporeal movables.