1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. According to the final and conclusive records of the conciliation protocol subject to quasi-deliberation, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on March 17, 2017, Seoul Southern District Court 2017Da7259, which sought payment of land usage fees, and the instant case was submitted to the conciliation on May 17, 2017 and the conciliation procedure was in progress under the same court 2017Ma2979. On July 21, 2017, the conciliation protocol (hereinafter “instant conciliation protocol”) is established, and the following details are established, and the protocol was prepared.

1. The defendant shall promptly deliver to the plaintiff each land listed in the separate sheet Nos. 2,3,4,5,7,8,9,13,17,18, and19.

The defendant transferred all ownership of the above land owned by the defendant to the plaintiff, and does not raise an objection against the plaintiff's arbitrary disposal of the above land.

2. By December 20, 2017, the Defendant removed 9 each of the lands listed in attached Table 1,6,10,11,12,14,15,16, 16, 20, and 21 and each of the lands listed in attached Table 1,6, 10, 112, 14, 15, 16, 20, and 20, to the Plaintiff, and remove all of the land owned by the Defendant in each of the greenhouse houses, crops, and things

3. If the Defendant did not perform the obligation described in paragraph (2), the Defendant transferred all ownership of each plastic house, ground object, agricultural product, or article as described in paragraph (2) to the Plaintiff on December 21, 2017, and then does not raise any objection against the Plaintiff’s arbitrary disposal thereof.

4. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

5. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne respectively;

2. Judgment as to the existence of a ground for quasi-examination

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the most important matter to pay the user fee as the plaintiff claimed the defendant to pay the user fee.

Nevertheless, the conciliation protocol subject to quasi-examination of this case was not judged at all.

This is equivalent to Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act, "when the judgment on important matters affecting the judgment is omitted."