1. Compulsory execution against the Plaintiff by the Defendant based on the protocol of compromise in the Daejeon District Court 2012No. 163.

Facts of recognition

On May 23, 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a sublease contract with the Defendant on the condition that part of the first floor of the building located in Daejeon Jung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant store”) among the first floor of the building located in Daejeon (hereinafter “instant store”) was leased between the Defendant and KRW 400 million, monthly rent of KRW 22 million (excluding value-added tax), and the lease period from June 1, 2012 to May 31, 2017.

On August 20, 2012, with regard to the detailed matters of the above sub-lease contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Daejeon District Court 2012No. 163 (hereinafter “instant protocol”) was drafted, and the main contents thereof are as follows.

1. The respondent (the plaintiff of this case) shall order the applicant (the defendant of this case) to provide real estate (the store of this case of this case) listed in the attached Form until May 31, 2017.

3. The respondent shall pay 400,000,000 won to the applicant for the lease deposit for the above real estate, and 40,000,000 won to the applicant on May 23, 2012, and 360,000,000 won to the applicant for the lease deposit for the above real estate;

9. Monthly rent shall be 22,00,000 won (per value-added tax) and the respondent shall pay in advance on the 30th of each month, calculated from the commencement date of the contract period;

25. In the event of a violation of the following provisions, this Agreement shall be automatically terminated without notice, and the respondent shall promptly order the applicant to give an order:

In the event that the sum of monthly rent, management expenses, taxes and public charges, etc. to be paid by the respondent exceeds two minutes, the Defendant, at the time of the conclusion of the sub-lease, operated the private enterprise with the trade name of the “C building”, and thereafter, established the corporation as “C” of the said corporation, and then appointed as the representative director

Accordingly, on October 15, 2012, the Plaintiff and the Defendant decided to change the name of the sub-lease under the above sub-lease contract for the store in this case to C, but the content of the sub-lease contract is to apply the same as the above sub-lease contract. In addition, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to apply the contents of the composition of this case equally.

【Ground of recognition】 There is no dispute;