A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed on November 29, 2012 that, in cases of unjust enrichment in Jeonju District Court, Jeonju District Court Decision 2012Da4419, the Plaintiff and the Defendants, “in a case where the Plaintiff should transfer the said grave to a third party the land located on the ground that the Plaintiff sold the said grave to a third party, the said grave shall restore the said grave to the Plaintiff without delay,” and that, on November 29, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to the effect that “in a case where the Plaintiff should restore the said grave to a third party the said grave.”

B. The Plaintiff became aware of the existence of the ground of the said F-land during the fourth period of the said grave, which was executed in accordance with the above protocol of compromise, between Defendant B’s 1 (hereinafter “first grave”) and that the said grave did not exist on the ground of the said F-land.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for removal of the building, etc. in Jeonju District Court, Jeonju District Court, 2015Kadan11821, and on December 23, 2015, the said court rendered a ruling to recommend reconciliation with the purport that, with respect to the instant two graves located in Defendant B, who is located in the 641m2, Gowon-gun, Gowon-gun, Gowon-gun, Jeonbuk-gun, Seoul District Court, the Plaintiff sold each of the above lands to a third party and was obliged to move the said two graves to a third party, and the Defendant B sold the said land to a third party.”

The above decision was finalized on January 12, 2016.

(hereinafter referred to as “A”) Lawsuit and the above Lawsuit are collectively referred to as “instant prior suit.”

However, the instant grave No. 1 is located in the boundary of the land D and E, such as the part of the land indicated in the separate sheet, rather than the said land D, and the instant grave No. 2 is located in the land E, such as the “B” portion indicating the said G land, rather than the said G land.

Therefore, the plaintiff is not a party.

have not been executed by a ruling of recommending reconciliation as stated in the subsection.

E. The Plaintiff is the above D land and E land (hereinafter “each of the instant land”).