1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for loans amounting to KRW 79 million at 97,00,000,000,000,000 against the Defendant. During the conciliation procedure (s. 6716, 200) to April 21, 2020, the Plaintiff and the Defendant voluntarily mediated the case.

B. The contents of the above mediation are as follows: “The Plaintiff waives the claim for the loan and does not raise any objection to it in the future civil or criminal charge (Article 1 and 2 of the Mediation Clause)”; and “The Plaintiff and the Defendant shall jointly live together with the ruling after having reported the re-re-explored until May 31, 2000, and shall pay a sum of KRW 50,000 to the other party in the event of destroying the re-Marriage relationship in the future (Article 3 of the Mediation Clause)” (hereinafter “Mediation Clause”).

[Evidence] Evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant did not report the marriage after the aforementioned conciliation, but did not comply with the report of marriage after the said conciliation, which was jointly living together with the Plaintiff. Since March 15, 2014, the contact with the Plaintiff was completely cut down without the Plaintiff’s telephone and reversed the relationship of marriage. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the amount to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant conciliation clause, and the Defendant filed the instant lawsuit to prove the fulfillment of the condition that the Defendant reversed the re-

B. Determination

A. The purport of the conciliation clause of this case is to determine the amount of consolation money for the failure of the marriage in case where the marriage relationship (including the de facto marital relationship) due to the merger between the plaintiff and the defendant is reversed, and it is reasonable to deem that the amount of consolation money for the failure of the marriage should be paid in advance if the reversal is mainly caused by the defendant's fault (in this regard, the defendant's assertion that the conciliation clause is null and void is not accepted). (b) Furthermore, it is difficult to examine whether the plaintiff and the defendant are mainly responsible for the failure of the de facto marital relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant, and the evidence submitted by the plaintiff is insufficient