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

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

1. Formation of quasi-examination mediation protocol;

A. On September 5, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the delivery of corporeal movables under the Suwon District Court Sejong District Court Decision 2017Gadan8338, but the said court transferred the said case to the Suwon District Court on January 22, 2018 on the ground of the violation of jurisdiction, and the Suwon District Court transferred the said case to the Suwon District Court. The Suwon District Court, upon the transfer of the said case, continued to have tried the said case in the case of delivery of corporeal movables (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”).

B. On April 26, 2018, the conciliation protocol (hereinafter “instant conciliation protocol”) was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on April 26, 2018, and the following conciliation provisions were prepared.

Conciliation Provisions

1. On May 31, 2018, the Defendant, at the same time, delivered KRW 200,000 as stated in the protocol of mediation of the usage fee case from the Plaintiff at Suwon District Court 2016Na66001, along with the payment of KRW 200,00 as stated in the separate sheet.

2. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

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

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, significant fact in this court, and purport of the whole pleading

2. Judgment on the grounds for quasi-examination

A. The conciliation protocol of this case should be revoked, inasmuch as there was no evidence to acknowledge that the volume and amount of movable property stated in the separate sheet submitted by the Plaintiff solely dependent on the Plaintiff’s memory, as well as there was no sufficient agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant on the gist of the Defendant’s assertion.

B. Inasmuch as a lawsuit on a retrial on the final judgment that became final and conclusive is permitted only when there exists a cause falling under any subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit on retrial is unlawful and thus ought to be dismissed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da31307, Oct. 25, 1996). The same applies to a conciliation with the same effect as a judicial compromise, and Articles 461 and 220 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act.