1. The 11-judicial tour court of the United States Pluda Roda Round Round 11, between the plaintiffs and the defendants.

1. Indication of claim;

A. In the case of the U.S. Plada 11 Judicial Tour Court 2017-01975-CA-01 between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, the Plaintiffs asserted that the Defendants deceptioned the Plaintiffs and obtained 90,000 U.S. dollars, thereby claiming compensation for damages due to nonperformance, and the said court rendered a final and conclusive judgment on December 12, 2017, stating that “The Defendants paid the Plaintiffs 321,258.09 U.S. dollars with 10,826.96 U.S. dollars with 10,826.96 U.S. dollars with 332,085.05 US dollars with 332,085.05 US dollars with 4.75% interest per annum from December 13, 2017 to the day of full payment.”

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant protocol”). B.

Therefore, the plaintiffs are seeking to permit compulsory execution based on the judgment of the Ririju in this case, since the judgment of the Ririju meets all the requirements stipulated in Article 217 of the Civil Procedure Act for the approval of a foreign judgment.

2. Articles 208 (3) 2 and 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts (a judgment made by deemed as private capital);

3. Part of rejection

A. Whether recognition of a final judgment, etc. by a foreign court is contrary to the good morals and other social order of the Republic of Korea as a result of the final judgment, etc. of the foreign court’s recognition should be determined in light of the case where the final judgment has dealt with the basic moral belief and social order that the domestic law intends to protect and the final judgment, etc

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da1284, Oct. 15, 2015). Article 217-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “Where a final and conclusive judgment, etc. on compensation for damages bring about a result significantly contrary to the laws of the Republic of Korea or to the basic order of international treaties concluded by the Republic of