1. The decision made by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on March 19, 2019 by the Intellectual Property Tribunal on the case No. 2631 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

. asserts that there should be no benefit and thus should be dismissed;

2) We examine the following facts. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 33, 40, and Eul evidence Nos. 5. ① The representative director G and G husband H (hereinafter “Plaintiff”)

On April 29, 2019, the Agreement entered into with the Defendant with the following content. The Agreement entered into an e-mail sent by A to B on April 10, 2019 (hereinafter “instant agreed e-mail”).

The purpose is to clean or prevent disputes related to all criminal, civil and industrial property rights that have been, or may be, in progress due to the cases referred to in the above subparagraphs, and that Gap and Eul agree as follows. Eul shall transfer the amount of defamation damage compensation received from Gap by the written judgment related to the infringement of trademark rights to Gap. Eul shall transfer the name of the parallel-related patent and trademark (I and other daily newspapers 17*18 cm) to Gap in a daily newspaper.

The gold bars in B and PPC kybrobrobes shall be transferred to A.

A and B shall agree to compensate for the expenses, etc. incurred due to the dispute in the presence of the attorney-at-law for further discussions.

A shall allow B to operate as the J agency of A.

After a written agreement is prepared and the amount of judgment under paragraph (1) has been deposited, A and B shall withdraw the civil and criminal lawsuit and request for a trial to the Korean Intellectual Property Office in the presence of the attorney-at-law.

on April 29, 2019: K B:

1. A representative director G of a stock company;

2. H:

3. G.

4. L representative H ② On April 30, 2019, pursuant to paragraph (1) of the instant agreement, the Plaintiff transferred KRW 76,850,50,00 that was received from the Defendant based on the final and conclusive judgment in the case involving the High Government District Court Decision 2015Kahap72804, 2015hap7442 (Counterclaim) to the Defendant.

3 According to the above facts, this case’s agreement is subject to Paragraph 7.