1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 28, 1998, E, the father of the plaintiffs, re-contributed with the defendant.

E bequeathed to the Defendant all the real estate owned by it, and died on August 28, 2014.

B. On January 13, 2016, the conciliation was concluded between the Plaintiffs, F and the Defendant in the Seoul Northern District Court 2015 money12784, and the conciliation protocol (hereinafter “instant conciliation protocol”) was prepared.

The Defendant shall, until January 15, 2017, sell 1,418 square meters to Plaintiff A and B by January 15, 2017, and then pay the balance calculated by deducting all taxes and public charges, such as transfer tax, from the proceeds of sale, by 1/19 each of the remaining amounts.

Provided, That if the defendant fails to settle the accounts by the above time, it shall pay 80,000 won each from the next month to the 15th day of each month of the payment for the settlement of accounts for sale.

(F) The last day shall be calculated on a daily basis).

Among the mediation protocol prepared, the parts related to the plaintiffs' claims are as follows.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment of this Court

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion in the instant protocol was established under the premise that the G Regional Housing Association promoted a redevelopment project on the land of one unit, including the land of 1,418 square meters in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu, and the said Association purchased the said land. However, since the redevelopment project was not created and the said land is difficult to be sold across a large amount, the facts constituting the basis for the formation of conciliation were modified without any cause attributable

Therefore, new adjustment should be conducted.

(b) Determination conciliation is concluded by stating the agreed matters between the parties in the protocol, and the protocol has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment, such as a protocol of judicial conciliation.

Therefore, since res judicata takes place between the parties, it is a separate issue to receive relief by quasi-examination procedures unless there is any reason such as the invalidation of a final and conclusive judgment.