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

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. According to the evidence evidence No. 1 of the record of quasi-deliberation, it is recognized that the following mediation was concluded on December 28, 2015 (hereinafter “instant mediation”) with respect to the case of objection filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant on December 28, 2015 against the Cheongju District Court 2015Kadan18473, which was filed by the Plaintiff, and the record of quasi-deliberation was prepared.

Conciliation Provisions

1. The Plaintiff shall transfer KRW 2,641,70 to the following account to the Defendant by January 28, 2016.

(Depositer: (B), bank of community credit cooperatives, account number: C) If the Plaintiff delays the payment of the above money, the interest rate of 15% per annum from the day following the date of payment to the day of full payment.

2. The defendant shall immediately withdraw an application for a compulsory auction of real estate completed as Cheongju District Court D and cancel its execution upon receiving the money under paragraph (1) from the plaintiff.

3. The plaintiff waives the remaining claims.

4. The costs of lawsuit and the costs of mediation shall be borne by each person;

2. Determination as to the lawfulness of the lawsuit for quasi-examination of this case

A. In the case of divorce between the Plaintiff’s assertion and the Defendant, the Cheongju District Court 2015Ddan3380, the Defendant deposited KRW 2,020,765, including delay damages, to the Defendant on November 3, 2015 (hereinafter “instant compulsory adjustment order”), and the Defendant received the instant deposit on December 2, 2015, with the purport that “the Plaintiff paid KRW 2 million to the Defendant and its delay damages, and the Defendant immediately withdraws an application for provisional disposition of real estate (2015 business group66) from the Plaintiff and rescinded its enforcement (hereinafter “instant compulsory adjustment order”).

Nevertheless, the defendant applied for a compulsory auction against the real estate owned by the plaintiff according to the decision of compulsory adjustment of this case, and the plaintiff applied for a compulsory auction against the defendant in order to prevent the compulsory execution.