1. The conciliation protocol that the Defendant has the executive force of the case No. 2014ddan683 against Nonparty C.

In full view of the overall purport of the arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including paper numbers), it is recognized that the plaintiff leased the lease deposit of KRW 2,00,000 to KRW 300,000 per month from D Apartment 101, 200,000 from E in Gyeyang-si, the plaintiff brought the lease deposit of KRW 10,00,00, and used it as the above apartment. The defendant rejected the defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff Nos. 13, 1, 1, electronic siren, 1, shock (including the table), 1, 1, shock (including the table), 1,2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, as to the above apartment. The defendant did not permit the compulsory execution against the non-party No. 3 pursuant to the protocol of mediation with executory force of the case No. 20144,683.

If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted as reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.