1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant's primary claim added at the trial of the court of first instance is presented to the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 16, 2011, the Defendant received a provisional disposition order against the Plaintiff that “the Plaintiff shall be allowed to peruse and copy the books and documents stated in the separate sheet” from the above support (hereinafter the instant provisional disposition order). The original copy of the decision was served on the Plaintiff on June 20, 201.

B. On June 24, 2011, the Defendant delegated all the powers relating to the perusal and copying of the books and documents listed in the separate sheet ordering the instant provisional disposition to the Taedo Accounting Firm, and the Taedo Accounting Firm sent to the Plaintiff a certificate of content indicating the deadline for performing obligations, perusal and copying of the documents stated in the separate sheet.

C. As the Plaintiff failed to comply with the order of the provisional disposition of this case, the Defendant filed an application for indirect compulsory performance against the Plaintiff to the above Support B, and on July 21, 201, the Defendant should allow the Plaintiff to peruse and copy the account books and documents entered in the separate sheet with the obligee for ten days from the day after the date of service of this decision, excluding public holidays. In the event that the Plaintiff fails to perform his/her obligation within the above period, the Plaintiff has received an indirect compulsory performance order (hereinafter “the instant indirect compulsory performance order”), and the Defendant was served on the Plaintiff on July 22, 2011.

The accountant C, who belongs to the accounting firm, had access to and copy part of the Plaintiff’s account books and documents during the period of performing the obligation determined by the decision of indirect compulsory performance of the instant case (from July 23, 2011 to August 3, 2011).

E. On September 29, 201 and October 17, 2011, the Defendant received respectively an execution clause based on the decision of indirect compulsory performance (hereinafter “each of the instant execution clause”) from the above support.

F. The Plaintiff’s aforementioned support 2012Kahap62