The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs 10 million won and 12% per annum from June 1, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments as set forth in subparagraphs 1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, “The Defendant shall pay 100,000,000 won to the Plaintiffs” in the lease deposit case between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, and the Defendant shall pay 20,000,000 won in five installments from May 31, 2010 to September 30, 2010. If the Defendant fails to pay each payment by each due date, it shall immediately lose the benefit of time, and shall pay the unpaid amount by adding damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day of loss of the benefit of time until the day of full payment, to the day of full payment,” the fact that the Reconciliation Recommendation Decision as of April 9, 2010 becomes final and conclusive on May 4, 2010, and the Defendant may fully recognize the fact that the above amount was not paid to the Plaintiffs.

According to the above facts, the defendant did not pay the first installment of KRW 20,000,000 on May 31, 2010, thereby losing the benefit of the above KRW 100,000. The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in this case for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of claims based on the decision of recommending reconciliation. It is clear in the record that the defendant is liable to pay to the plaintiffs the above KRW 100,000,000 and the delay damages calculated at the rate of 12% per annum per annum from June 1, 2020 to the date of full payment, as claimed by the plaintiffs.

On July 25, 2008, the defendant argued to the effect that the plaintiffs were exempted from the obligation to pay the above amount since the plaintiffs agreed to receive the above amount from the non-party D. However, if there is no objection as to the decision of recommending reconciliation within the prescribed period, the decision of recommending reconciliation has the same effect as the judicial compromise, and therefore there is a decision of recommending reconciliation that is confirmed in the previous suit between the same parties as to the existence of rights or legal relations which are disputed in the lawsuit.