1. The defendant's Daegu District Court 2004Kadan115474, which has executive force of the guaranteed debt of the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. Around January 2002, the Defendant entered into a transportation service contract with the Newnam Logistics Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) around January 2002, and filed a lawsuit seeking the guaranteed debt against the Plaintiff who jointly and severally guaranteed the claim amounting to KRW 16,683,637 on the part of the Nonparty Company.

(F) Daegu District Court 2004Kadan115474).(b)

On November 30, 2004, conciliation was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant on November 30, 2004, and the contents of conciliation are as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as “instant conciliation.” The plaintiff in the instant lawsuit is the defendant, the defendant, the plaintiff is the plaintiff, and the party is indicated on the basis of this case under the convenience below). The plaintiff shall pay 16,683,637 won to the defendant up to May 31, 2005. If delay is made, the plaintiff shall pay damages for delay calculated by adding 20% per annum to the above money from June 1, 2005.

C. The Defendant applied for a compulsory auction of real estate to this court based on the original copy of the above protocol of mediation, and the decision to commence compulsory auction was made on May 7, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. A. A summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Around December 1, 2004, when ten years have elapsed from the date following the date the conciliation was completed, and around December 12, 2014, a claim based on the above conciliation protocol became extinct. ② The Defendant had already extinguished the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant, the guaranteed obligation, inasmuch as the primary obligation was not claimed once from 2004 to the present time, and the primary obligation was extinguished due to the lack of a claim against the Nonparty Company, the primary obligor, and thus, the period of reimbursement under the conciliation protocol was set as May 31, 2005 at the time of the conciliation officer’s request, and ten years have not elapsed thereafter, the extinctive prescription period is expired from June 1, 2005, and the Defendant applied for compulsory auction.