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

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the respondent.

1. The applicant for confirmation of the protocol subject to quasi-examination filed with the respondent an application for a payment order with the same content as the purport of the above application, but filed an application for mediation with the Changwon District Court (2015.53). On April 16, 2015, in the above application for mediation, the protocol of mediation (hereinafter “instant protocol of mediation”) was prepared as follows.

1. “1. The respondent shall consider the applicant (the wife of the respondent) to audit the applicant’s business assistance and, until the end of August 2015, shall endeavour to look at the applicant’s assistance to C, the head of the respondent, and shall endeavour to recover scenic relations between the Respondent’s head and the applicant.

2. The respondent acknowledges that, as of April 15, 2015, the applicant is liable for outstanding amounts of KRW 50,585,510 to the applicant.

3. If the respondent does not comply with paragraph 1 above, the Respondent shall claim the Respondent the amount of money under Paragraph 2 above, and the Respondent shall pay it.

4. The applicant’s remaining claims shall be waived;

5. Costs of the petition shall be borne individually by each party;

''

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit for quasi-deliberation of this case

A. Although the respondent's assertion that the extinctive prescription has expired, it is not reflected in the instant protocol, and it is also unclear that "reparing relationship" as stated in the instant protocol constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act. As such, the instant protocol for conciliation should be revoked.

B. The conciliation of a judgment has the same effect as a judicial compromise (Article 29 of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act). In a case where a protocol is entered in a judicial compromise, the protocol has the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment (Article 220 of the Civil Procedure Act). Therefore, the conciliation protocol is recognized as res judicata, and the same reason as the final and conclusive judgment exists.