2. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant’s assertion that this case’s conciliation was conducted following the designation of conciliation date by a conciliation commissioner who has no authority to designate the conciliation date after the lack of conciliation. Since the designation of conciliation date by a person who has no authority to designate the conciliation date becomes invalid, the instant conciliation protocol is null and void.

B. On April 28, 2016, when the Plaintiff and the Defendant and the Defendant’s attorney-at-law attended the conciliation of the instant case, the conciliation of the instant case did not reach agreement between the parties, and the mediator D reported the failure to reach agreement to the presiding judge. According to the presiding judge’s declaration of failure to mediate the case, the Defendant and the Defendant’s agent left the conciliation room, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s agent requested additional conciliation with the Defendant. If the mediator received the Defendant’s telephone number from the Plaintiff and asked the Defendant to make additional conciliation with the Defendant, the mediator called the Defendant again to the conciliation room. The mediator called the Defendant again to the conciliation room; the Defendant and the Defendant who returned to the conciliation room after receiving the Defendant’s telephone call from the Plaintiff and returned to the conciliation room was agreed to the same content as the attached conciliation clause as the Plaintiff and the Defendant; the presiding judge did not dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant or confirmed the content of agreement in the conciliation room in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings. Article 15(2) of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act (1).

(2) Notification of the date of conciliation shall be made.