1. The Defendant’s payment order was based on the payment order for loans in the Daegu District Court Branch 2012 tea 2926 against the Plaintiff.

Based on the facts, the Defendant received a payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the Plaintiff to the effect that the Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff KRW 70 million and the amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from July 26, 2006 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant payment order”). Based on this order, on February 25, 2015, the Defendant was issued a decision to commence compulsory auction with the Seo-gu Daegu District Court Branch Branch D on February 25, 2015 with respect to KRW 2 and 501, Daegu-gu Apartment 2 and 501, which is owned by the Plaintiff.

On July 22, 2015, the Defendant, upon receiving KRW 90 million from the Plaintiff, voluntarily withdrawn the said compulsory auction, and upon receiving KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff on October 29, 2015, revoked the right to collateral security established in the name of the Defendant on December 24, 2003 regarding the said real estate.

On October 29, 2015, the Defendant agreed to withdraw the application for compulsory auction and cancel the right to collateral security upon receiving KRW 95 million on the instant payment order from the Plaintiff and to waive the remainder of the claims in the future.

(hereinafter “instant agreement”). After the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on October 29, 2015, on the ground of the loan certificate issued by the Defendant on November 1, 2005 (hereinafter “instant agreement”), demanding payment of loans of KRW 20 million with the Daegu District Court 2015 Ghana6701 and its delay damages (hereinafter “relevant lawsuit”), and withdrawn the lawsuit on March 9, 2016.

Accordingly, on January 22, 2016, the Defendant was issued a ruling to commence a compulsory auction as Seoggu District Court Branch E with respect to the above real estate on the ground of the instant payment order.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 7 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including numbers), and the plaintiff asserted the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff asserted that all the defendant's claims under the payment order of this case are extinguished in accordance with the agreement of this case, so compulsory execution under the payment order of this case shall not be allowed.