1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2:

On July 20, 2012, the Plaintiff leased a part of the store in Dongjak-gu Seoul, C, D, E, and F ground clean water market (hereinafter “each of the instant stores”) from the Defendant during the lease deposit of KRW 23,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 2,690,000, and from April 1, 201 to April 30, 2013, and operated a restaurant at a place.

B. After that, around October 2012, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for a compromise prior to the filing of a lawsuit with the Suwon District Court (Seoul District Court Branch Branch 2012No. 409). On the date of settlement opened on October 18, 2012, G attorney-at-law and Defendant’s subagent H attorney-at-law were present, and the following content was written in a protocol of compromise (hereinafter “instant protocol of compromise”).

1. The applicant (the defendant) and the respondent (the plaintiff) confirm that the lease contract was concluded with respect to each of the stores of this case by setting the lease period of 23,00,000 won from April 1, 201 to April 30, 2013, and the rent of 2,690,000 won (value added tax and payment by the end of each month).

2. When the above contract period expires, the respondent shall promptly order each of the above leased buildings to the applicant.

3. The instant lease agreement term is from April 1, 201 to April 30, 2013.

Provided, That if the respondent intends to continue to lease, it shall be subject to the re-lease contract, and the implied renewal of Article 639 of the Civil Code shall not be recognized.

(hereinafter omitted)

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the instant protocol of conciliation has no effect for the following reasons, and that compulsory execution based on the instant protocol of conciliation should not be denied.

① At the time of drawing up the instant protocol of conciliation, the Plaintiff did not know the content of the compromise at the Defendant’s request and prepared a power of attorney necessary for the compromise prior to filing a lawsuit.