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

2. The costs of quasi-examination are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff and quasi-examination Plaintiff).

1. Basic facts

A. On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, C, D, and E as described in the purport of the claim in the main claim. The cause of the claim against the Defendant was to seek the division of the said real estate against the Defendant, who is the co-owner of the real estate listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and to seek the return of unjust enrichment from the Defendant’s full use of the said real estate.

B. On October 30, 2017, the Defendant filed a counterclaim with the Plaintiff, such as the purport of the counterclaim (which was based on the transfer agreement as of August 8, 2005, but subsequently amended the purport of the claim that was based on the transfer agreement as of May 8, 2005). The cause of the claim was that the Defendant returned the purchase fund of the instant real estate provided by the Plaintiff and agreed to transfer 1/2 of the shares of the instant real estate to the Defendant on May 8, 2005, and the Plaintiff agreed to transfer 1/2 of the share of the instant real estate to the Defendant on May 8, 2005. As such, the Plaintiff demanded the Defendant to implement the procedure for the transfer registration of ownership as to

C. On June 20, 2018, the first instance court accepted part of the Plaintiff’s main claim and ordered the auction division of the instant real estate, and ordered the Defendant to dismiss the Defendant’s counterclaim claim.

On December 10, 2018, the appellate court rendered a decision in lieu of conciliation to the effect that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 200 million to the Plaintiff KRW 1/2 of the instant real estate at the same time as the purchase price is paid, and the Defendant would implement the procedures for ownership transfer registration on December 10, 2018 with respect to KRW 1/2 of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff, and that the Defendant would pay KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “decision subject to quasi-adjudication”).

E. On January 28, 2019, the above decision was delivered to the Defendant’s legal representative (Attorney Kim Do-do, and I), and on January 29, 2019, to the Plaintiff’s legal representative (law firm Locom), but the said decision became final and conclusive as it did not object to both the Defendant and the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, as a whole.