1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on September 14, 2018 upon the completion of conciliation.

2. The defendant dated September 19, 2018.

1. On September 14, 2018, at the first conciliation date, the fact that the plaintiffs' representatives and the defendant present their respective representatives on September 14, 2018 and completed voluntary conciliation is significant in this court.

Meanwhile, on September 19, 2018, after the above mediation date, the defendant argued that "cases concerning the mediation agreement" was signed on September 14, 2018, and the defendant Eul, who is not aware of the law, signed and sealed the mediation agreement with the knowledge of the establishment of the appeal and appeal even after signing the mediation agreement, and signed and sealed it with the knowledge of the establishment of the mediation agreement, and the payment of the construction cost of 3/8 on the plaintiff side would incur enormous damages to the defendant." The above mediation was not completed due to the above argument.

or may not be deemed as a failure of establishment.

(S) The concept of objection to the agreement itself cannot be presented again, and the reasons why the plaintiffs do not pay the construction cost to the defendant after the conclusion of the mediation will be according to the provisions of Paragraph (2) of the above conciliation (Article 29 of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act). 2. The conciliation of judgment has the same effect as a judicial compromise (Article 29 of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act). Since the lawsuit of this case between the plaintiffs and the defendant has been terminated by the formation of the above voluntary conciliation, it is so decided as per Disposition by the declaration of termination of the lawsuit