1. The instant lawsuit was terminated upon the decision in lieu of the conciliation on September 14, 2005 became final and conclusive on October 11, 2005.

2.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant seeking “payment of the agreed subcontract price” on September 9, 2004.

B. On September 14, 2005, the court of the trial held the date of mediation, and the plaintiffs were present on the above date of mediation, and the defendant and the defendant's attorney were absent.

On September 14, 2005, the court of the trial rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation that "the plaintiffs withdraw the application for provisional seizure against claim from the Ulsan District Court 2004Kadan11384. The defendant shall pay 2.3 million won to the plaintiffs simultaneously with the withdrawal of the above application for provisional seizure. The plaintiffs renounced the remaining claims and rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation that "the costs of the lawsuit and the costs of the conciliation shall be borne by each party" (hereinafter "the decision of this case").

C. The plaintiff A was served the decision of this case on September 26, 2005; the plaintiff B and the defendant on September 21, 2005; and both parties did not raise an objection within two weeks thereafter.

[Reasons for Recognition] Clear fact in records, significant fact in the court of a trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the decision of this case was finalized on October 11, 2005 with the time limit for filing an objection, barring any special circumstance, and the lawsuit of this case was completed.

B. As to this, Plaintiff B asserts that the instant lawsuit was unilaterally brought against the Defendant without the Plaintiff’s consent or delegation, and that both the instant lawsuit and the instant decision are null and void.

In addition, the materials submitted by the Plaintiff alone are insufficient to prove the above facts, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

On the other hand, Article 461 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that where a party fails to file an objection against a decision substituting conciliation within two weeks from the date of receipt of the decision, the above decision has the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment, and thus res judicata has occurred between the parties. Therefore, unless there are the same reasons as the grounds of the rightful invalidation of the final and