1. The defendant's decision to recommend reconciliation in the Daejeon District Court's Daejeon District Court's 2016Gadan10960 against the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant received a claim attachment and collection order (hereinafter “instant claim attachment and collection order”) regarding C’s damage claim against C, based on the authentic copy of an executory deed, No. 54, 2016, which was executed by a notary public who belongs to the Seoul Northern District Prosecutor’s Office, based on C’s office, and the claim amount as KRW 25,000,000, which was collected by the Government District Court 2016TT No. 3361, Apr. 6, 2016.

B. In the case of divorce, etc. brought against the Plaintiff et al., the District Court 2016dride505 (the Plaintiff of this case) that “A (the Plaintiff of this case) shall pay C KRW 5,00,000,000, which shall be divided into KRW 2,000,000 until December 31, 2016, and KRW 3,000,000 until March 31, 2017, which shall be paid by dividing the amount of KRW 3,00,000,” which was finalized on November 23, 2016.

C. The Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming collection against the Plaintiff as the court 2016da10960, which became final and conclusive on January 5, 2017, stating that “The Defendant (the Plaintiff of this case) shall pay five million won to the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff of this case) in the deposit method (Article 248 of the Civil Execution Act), but shall be paid in installments by two million won until December 31, 2016 and three million won until March 31, 2017.”

(hereinafter referred to as the "Recommendation for Settlement of this case") D.

On December 30, 2016, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 2,000,000 as 3250,000 for the Daejeon District Court Branch Branch of Daejeon District Court in accordance with Article 248 of the Civil Execution Act. On March 17, 2017, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 3,000,000 as 602,00 for the Daejeon District Court Branch of 2017, pursuant to Article 248 of the Civil Execution Act.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 23 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant according to the decision on the recommendation of reconciliation in this case is deemed to have been fully satisfied, and thus, the decision on the recommendation of reconciliation in this case is made, since the Plaintiff deposited for execution pursuant to Article 248 of the Civil Execution Act, respectively, of KRW 2,00,000, and KRW 3,000,000, March 17, 2017.