1. On September 29, 201, the senior court clerk of this court as to the decision of indirect compulsory performance against the plaintiff of this court against the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 4, 2011, the Defendant filed an application with the Plaintiff for provisional disposition against the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff, who had a title prior to the change, LWn T&T Co., Ltd., and the Plaintiff) for provisional disposition against perusal and copying of accounting books, as the court 201Kahap26, and this court on June 16, 2011, issued a provisional disposition order with the purport that “the Plaintiff shall allow the Defendant to peruse and copy the accounting books and documents in the separate sheet for 10 days except for legal holidays from the day following service of this decision (hereinafter “instant provisional disposition order”), and the original copy was served on the Plaintiff on June 20, 2011.

B. On July 7, 2011, the Defendant filed an application for indirect compulsory enforcement against the Plaintiff to this court for the instant provisional disposition order, and this Court shall allow the Defendant to peruse and copy the account books and documents in the separate sheet for ten days from the day following the service of this decision to July 21, 201, excluding public holidays. If the Plaintiff fails to perform his/her obligation within the said period, the Defendant made an indirect compulsory enforcement order (hereinafter in this case, the indirect compulsory enforcement order) to which the amount calculated at the rate of five million won per day from the day following the expiration of the said period until the completion of the performance thereof. The original decision was delivered to the Plaintiff and the Defendant on July 22, 201, and confirmed on July 30, 201, the Defendant received each of the instant indirect compulsory enforcement order (hereinafter referred to as the “instant execution clause”).

C. Meanwhile, on the other hand, on February 15, 2016, the Plaintiff was ordered to commence rehabilitation as the Changwon District Court 2016 Ma1006, and A was appointed as the administrator of the Plaintiff who is a debtor for rehabilitation and taken over the instant lawsuit. On the other hand, on January 4, 2017, the Plaintiff was notified of the decision to discontinue rehabilitation procedures, and the Plaintiff taken over the instant lawsuit.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, Eul evidence No. 3-1, 2, Eul evidence No. 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The time period during which the duty to act in the form of judgment shall be determined, with respect to the duty to act in the military unit.