1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

purport.

1. The Defendant, having no dispute, sought damages on the ground of defects in the machinery supplied by the Plaintiff, and the conciliation was concluded on November 21, 2017.

(S) The conciliation clause includes the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 93 million to the Defendant following the cancellation of the contract in the event that the Plaintiff does not comply with the inspection criteria set out in the conciliation clause even at the time of the second inspection. The conciliation clause includes: (a) the Plaintiff’s payment of KRW 93 million to the Defendant following the cancellation of contract.

As a result of the examination, the defendant started compulsory execution after being granted execution clause to the mediation protocol on the ground that the plaintiff failed to comply with the examination guidelines set forth in the mediation clause.

The plaintiff asserted that he did not meet the standard of inspection, and filed a lawsuit of objection against the defendant, and on May 15, 2020, the plaintiff filed a separate lawsuit of objection against grant of execution clause (this court 2020 Ghana 116890).

2. Whether the fulfillment of a condition, which is the requirement for judgment on grant of execution clause, is a matter to be asserted and examined in a lawsuit of demurrer against grant of execution clause related to grant of execution clause, or matters to be deliberated in a lawsuit of objection against grant of execution clause, and matters to be deliberated in a lawsuit of objection demanding the exclusion of executive force held by the executive title on the ground of an objection raised against the claim

Therefore, in the lawsuit of objection seeking the exclusion of the executory power of the conciliation protocol, the argument that the debtor did not violate the terms and conditions of the conciliation protocol can not be raised as a ground of objection.

(see Supreme Court Decision 201Da92916, Apr. 13, 2012). The purport of the Plaintiff, rather than contesting the executory power of the conciliation clause itself, is not to dispute, but to dispute that the execution clause was granted for the Defendant despite the Plaintiff’s fulfillment of the conditions of examination as prescribed by the conciliation clause, and the compulsory execution procedure was in progress. Therefore, this ought to be deliberated in a lawsuit of objection against the grant of execution clause, rather than a lawsuit of objection.