In June 1, 2017, the defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff is denied based on the decision of 2016Gaso28659.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 1, 2017, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the return of the lease deposit with this court, and rendered a judgment on June 1, 2017 that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant the amount of KRW 3,400,000 and interest calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from November 26, 2016 to the date of full payment” (the judgment of this case refers to “the judgment of this case”; and accordingly, the Plaintiff’s obligation against the Defendant was referred to as “the obligation of this case”). The judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

B. On September 20, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited the Defendant’s repayment of KRW 3,817,780 (i.e., principal amount of KRW 3,400,000 on the grounds of the Defendant’s impossibility of receiving payment (i.e., KRW 417,780 on the basis of 15% per annum from November 26, 2016 to September 20, 2017).

(U.S. District Court No. 8204, No. 8204, 2017 (hereinafter “the deposit of this case”). / [The grounds for recognition] of no dispute, evidence No. 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, since the defendant's obligation to the defendant of this case was extinguished due to the deposit of this case, compulsory execution against the plaintiff of this case shall not be permitted.

In light of the costs of lawsuit and auction costs (Songsung Branch Branch of Daejeon District Court), the Defendant asserted to the effect that the deposit of this case alone cannot be deemed to have been fully paid the amount of the judgment of this case, but this cannot be accepted for the following reasons.

(1) In order for a creditor to receive litigation costs from an obligor, the court shall separately obtain a decision on the confirmation of litigation costs and may not be paid only by the final and conclusive judgment on the merits without such decision.

(2) In cases of expenses for compulsory execution, a person who is entitled to preferential compensation by the original compulsory execution without any separate executive title for the collection thereof (Article 53 (1) of the Civil Execution Act), but the decision of the court of execution to determine the amount of expenses for the execution shall be separately made.