1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on January 16, 2015 by the final and conclusive decision of the court to recommend reconciliation.

2. Termination of the lawsuit;

ex officio, we examine the termination of the instant lawsuit.

On January 16, 2015, this Court rendered a decision to recommend reconciliation (hereinafter “the decision to recommend reconciliation in this case”) stating that “the Defendant shall deliver the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.” The original copy of the decision to recommend reconciliation in this case was served on the Plaintiff on January 21, 2015, and the Defendant received the original copy of the decision to recommend reconciliation in this case directly and directly on February 9, 2015. The fact that the Defendant submitted a written objection sealed by the Defendant as of February 16, 2015 on the decision to recommend reconciliation in this case is apparent in the record.

However, according to the records, ① the Defendant submitted a written reply disputing the Plaintiff’s request as of October 23, 2014, and submitted to this court the document to the effect that “to accept the Plaintiff’s request” as of January 15, 2015, as of “cancellation of the written reply.” ② The Defendant’s seal affixed on the above written reply is the same as the Defendant’s seal affixed on September 1, 2012 lease agreement under the Defendant’s name. The above written reply is accompanied by a copy of the Defendant’s resident registration certificate; ③ the above written reply submitted as of February 16, 2015 is written as “B’s husband”; ④ the Defendant’s seal affixed as of February 16, 2015, other than the Defendant’s seal affixed as of February 16, 2015; ④ the Defendant changed from “B” to “C” to “C”, and the Defendant’s signature and seal affixed as of February 16, 2015 to the Defendant’s request for correction and correction of the Plaintiff’s name (3).