1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the legal spouse B, such as divorce (Seoul Family Court 2014Dhap305064), and the Plaintiff filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff, such as divorce (Seoul Family Court 2015Dhap40807).

On April 12, 2016, the Plaintiff and B entered into mediation (hereinafter “instant mediation”) between the Plaintiff and B, stating that “The Plaintiff and B shall be divorced. The Plaintiff shall be paid KRW 170,00,000 as a division of property to the Plaintiff until July 13, 2016. The Plaintiff and B shall not claim for any property, such as consolation money, division of property, and child support, with respect to the marriage and divorce of the instant case, except as otherwise provided in the above.”

B. After that, B filed a prior claim for a divided pension with the Defendant under Articles 64 and 64-3 of the National Pension Act and Article 22(2) of the former Enforcement Rule of the National Pension Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 526, Sept. 22, 2017; hereinafter the same), and the Defendant received the prior claim for the said divided pension and notified the Plaintiff of the receipt of the prior claim for the said divided pension (hereinafter “instant notification”).

C. On May 8, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant that “B did not claim any property against the Plaintiff in the instant conciliation, and thus, the Plaintiff rejected B’s prior claim for division of the divided pension.” The Defendant respondeded to the effect that “The right to receive the divided pension under the National Pension Act falls under the inherent right under the National Pension Act, the nature of the right to claim the division of property under the Civil Act, and thus, B’s prior claim for division of the divided pension cannot be dismissed in the instant conciliation.” (hereinafter “instant reply”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.