1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The facts of recognition D was ruled on January 15, 2015 in Suwon District Court 2014Dada31878, Sung-nam Branch, Sung-nam Branch, Seoul District Court 2014Dada31878, that “Defendant B shall pay D 11,813,730 won and interest calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 12, 2014 to the date of full payment,” and that the judgment became final and conclusive on February 11, 2015.

D In the lawsuit of the Suwon District Court 2014da30826 against C, Sungwon District Court 2014Gadan30826, “C shall pay to D 30 million won by the end of September 2015, in installments, the amount of KRW 10 million by the end of October 2015, the amount of KRW 10 million by the end of October 2015, and KRW 10 million by the end of November 2015, and if C delays the payment of the installment at once, it shall immediately lose the benefit of time, and C shall pay the remainder to D plus damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day following the day of loss of the interest due to the remainder and the day of full payment.” The above decision became final and conclusive on July 2, 2015 upon the compulsory adjustment order issued on June 13, 2015.

On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff received an order to seize and seize the following claims against the Defendants from D, and the said order became final and conclusive around that time.

- The fact that there is no dispute over KRW 19,787,360 out of the agreed amount claims under the agreement dated May 28, 2014, which was sought by the Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam Branch's 2014Gau31878 (No. 2014Gau313,730) among the long-term repair appropriations repayment claims claimed by the Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam Branch's 2014Gau306 (No. 14,513,730) from among the long-term repair appropriations repayment claims to be claimed by the Sungwon District Court's Sung-nam branch's 2014Gau

2. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

A final and conclusive judgment shall have effect on a successor after the closing of argument pursuant to Article 218 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

A decision in lieu of conciliation has the same effect as a judicial compromise under Article 34(4) of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act, and thus res judicata has occurred between the parties, and Supreme Court Decision 2000Da33690 Decided September 29, 200.