1. Compulsory execution based on the judgment of Daejeon District Court Branch 2012Gahap3268 against the Plaintiff by the Defendants is attached Table.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff related to the parties is a corporation that produces skining, fluoring, air-comers, etc., and the Defendants are the employees of the Plaintiff company.

B. On May 25, 2012, the Plaintiff, including the Defendants, filed a lawsuit seeking wage payment against the Plaintiff on May 25, 2012, as the Plaintiff’s lock-out was unlawful in the Daejeon District Court’s astronomical Branch (2012Gahap3268). As such, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming wage payment for the said period.

On September 26, 2014, the first instance court determined that a lock-out for the Youngdong factory was without justification from the commencement of the lock-out itself, and that a lock-out for the Asan factory was void from July 12, 2011, and sentenced workers belonging to the Asan factory to pay the daily average wage corresponding to 41 days (from July 12, 2011 to August 21, 201) for the workers belonging to the Asan factory, and to pay damages for delay from September 11, 2011 for the workers belonging to the dong factory (from May 23, 2011 to August 21, 201) for each day average wage corresponding to 91 days (from August 23, 2011 to August 21, 201) and for them.

(hereinafter “Prior Judgment”). Although the Plaintiff appealed, the Daejeon High Court (2014Na3779) rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on October 15, 2015, and the Supreme Court (2015Da64469) also dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on April 12, 2018, the Prior Judgment became final and conclusive as it is, by dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal.

C. On April 13, 2018, the Plaintiff paid the amount calculated by multiplying the number of days of illegal lock-out by the daily average wage to the employees filing the lawsuit except the Defendants pursuant to the instant preceding judgment. The Defendants were in fact paid the amount excluding taxes and social insurance premiums withheld at source, etc. during the period determined in the instant preceding judgment as illegal lock-out period. The Defendants were in fact paid the amount of illegal lock-out days on the ground that they returned to work for some of the period during which they were determined as the illegal lock-out period in the instant preceding judgment