1. The petition for quasi-examination of this case and the petition for intervention of the plaintiff (the succeeding plaintiff)'s successor shall be dismissed.

2...

1. On May 15, 2018, it is evident that the instant protocol of conciliation, which is a provision of conciliation, has been prepared on the same day, on the same day, on the following grounds: (a) the agreement between the Plaintiff, the Defendants, and G (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”) under the quasi-deliberation protocol was concluded between the Plaintiff, the Defendants, and the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Defendant, etc.”) to the effect that “the Plaintiff, etc. withdraws the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, etc.; and (b) the Defendant, etc. consents to the withdrawal of the lawsuit”

2. Whether the lawsuit for quasi-examination of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff asserts that the conciliation protocol in this case is established with the consent to the conciliation clause of the above conciliation protocol without being able to be seen as a threat by coercion or coercion of standing mediators H, and that there is a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)4 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. In a case subject to review and conciliation, where a party's arbitrary conciliation is constituted by interfering with the submission of the method of offence and defense by a judge in charge of official or criminal acts, such as fraud and coercion, the court may file a lawsuit for quasi-deliberation only under Article 451 (1) 4 and 5 of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 461 of the same Act, where "when a judge involved in the trial commits a crime relating to his/her duties," or "when a judge interferes with the submission of the method of offence and defense, which may affect the judgment, due to another person's act subject to criminal punishment," but even in such case, only where "when the judgment of conviction against an act subject to punishment, etc., becomes final and conclusive, or it is impossible to render a final and conclusive judgment, etc. on conviction for reasons other than lack of evidence" pursuant to Article 451 (2) of the same Act, and where the requirements of Article 451 (2) of the same Act are not met, a lawsuit for quasi-deliberation shall be filed for quasi-deliberation, without any