1. The defendant's written decision in lieu of the conciliation of 2010Na13310 dated October 11, 2010 against the defendant's plaintiff was based on the Daejeon District Court's written decision in lieu of the conciliation.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 11, 2010, the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation (2010Na13310, hereinafter “instant decision”) against the Plaintiff and the Defendant as follows.

1. The Plaintiff shall pay 1,800,000 won to the Defendant by December 31, 2010. If the said amount is not paid by the payment date, the Plaintiff shall pay the unpaid amount plus damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the payment date to the day of full payment.

2. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

3. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;

B. On February 12, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for a compulsory auction against the Plaintiff’s real estate based on the executory exemplification of the instant decision with the Daejeon District Court’s official branch office, and received the order to commence compulsory auction from the said court on February 23, 2015 (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”).

C. On February 22, 2017, the Plaintiff’s general secretary C and D sought to pay a cashier’s check, which is the cause of par value 5,711,914, at the time of official residence of the Defendant, but the Defendant refused to receive the check.

On February 23, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited the principal amount of KRW 1,80,00 according to the instant order in Daejeon District Court’s official order, KRW 2,213,260 in total, and KRW 1,69,640 in total, for the reasons of the Defendant’s refusal to receive payments (hereinafter “instant deposit”).

E. On March 2, 2017, the Daejeon District Court rendered a decision to suspend the compulsory execution of the instant case upon the Plaintiff’s request (2017 Chicago3).

[Grounds for Recognition: Each entry or statement of evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, and 10, or the purport of the whole pleading and pleading of evidence]

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. Before filing the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff had already filed an objection against the Defendant regarding the instant decision (hereinafter “instant prior suit”), and the instant prior suit is subsequent to the instant lawsuit.