1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded automobile insurance for Bsch Rexton vehicles owned by the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant insurance”). (b)

The Plaintiff suffered bodily injury, such as the right-side fluoral fluor and the fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoring bus in the signal atmosphere, due to the negligence of entering the intersection in violation of the signal.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). C.

With respect to the damages caused by the instant accident, the Plaintiff prepared a written agreement with the Defendant that “The Plaintiff shall receive 20 million won as a whole of the legal damages (including all the damage compensation for business suspension, damage, and loss of disability) and promise to waive all rights related to the instant accident in the future and not to file a civil lawsuit or objection for any reason.”

(hereinafter “Agreement in this case”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap evidence Nos. 2, 3, 7, and 8, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because it violates the non-committee special agreement.

According to the above facts of recognition, the plaintiff entered into a non-prosecution special agreement with the defendant to exempt the defendant from filing a civil lawsuit due to the accident of this case.

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is unlawful because it violates the above non-committee agreement.

Since the defendant's defense prior to the merits is justified.

B. As to this, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant's compensation staff dismissed the agreement in this case by deceiving the plaintiff's compensation staff to be a permanent disability, and that the agreement in this case would be cancelled because it is by deception.

On the other hand, Article 110(1) of the Civil Code provides that an expression of intent by fraud may be cancelled, and the expression of intent by fraud here is an intentional act in the concept of fraud.