The decision of the Incheon District Court 2003 Ghana 365421 against the plaintiff is based on the recommendation of reconciliation in the loan case.

Basic Facts

A. In the case of loans between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, Incheon District Court Decision 2003 Ghana 365421, January 7, 2004, the Plaintiff should pay to the Defendant 12 million won and 20% interest per annum from November 26, 2003 to the date of full payment.

“The decision to recommend reconciliation (hereinafter “the decision to recommend reconciliation in this case”) was made, and this decision became final and conclusive on January 29, 2004.

B. The details that the Plaintiff deposited to the Defendant are as follows.

Amount of deposit day (won) 8,000,000 on December 13, 2019, 2000 on December 2, 19, 2019, 2000,000 December 2, 2019, 27,000,000 on December 27, 2019, 200,000 on February 5, 2020, 2000

B. On April 7, 2020, the Defendant issued a collection order (the Suwon District Court, 2344, 200, 2020, 22,156,164) against the Plaintiff’s wage claim against the Plaintiff C based on the decision of recommending reconciliation of this case. The Defendant received a seizure and collection order (the Suwon District Court, 2020, 200, 2344) against the wage claim against the Plaintiff C.

[Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy Facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5]

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. On January 9, 2020, the Plaintiff alleged that the Defendant: (a) on January 9, 2020, stated that “it would not have any more deposit of KRW 50 million; and (b) would have any more deposit of KRW 5,000,000 to withdraw the registration in the register; and (c) even if the Plaintiff remitted additional KRW 5,00,000 on February 12, 2020, the Defendant is subject to compulsory execution against

The compulsory execution based on the recommendation decision of the settlement of this case should be dismissed, inasmuch as the debt following the recommendation of settlement of this case was fully repaid according to the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant

B. First of all, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that there was such an agreement with the Plaintiff and the Defendant on January 9, 2020 on whether the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to further deposit KRW 5 million with the Defendant to exempt the remainder of the obligation.

Meanwhile, there is no evidence that there was an agreement or designation as to how the Plaintiff would appropriate the amount deposited from December 13, 2019 to February 12, 2020 for the remaining obligation.