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

2. The costs of quasi-examination shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Decision on recommending a compromise subject to quasi-examination;

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants with the same content as the claim stated in this Court No. 2014Gahap3406.

B. On July 23, 2014, the instant court rendered a ruling of recommending reconciliation with the purport that “the Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 26,244,505 won and interest thereon at the rate of 20% per annum from December 16, 2013 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “the instant ruling of recommending reconciliation”). The instant ruling of recommending reconciliation was finalized on August 14, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, substantial facts in this court, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendants was paid in excess of KRW 1,728,160 as the annual salary from the Defendant Company B for the benefit of 2013, and was paid in excess of KRW 15,302,665, and was not paid in excess of KRW 13,574,505 ( KRW 15,302,665 - 1,728,160).

Nevertheless, the Plaintiff filed a false report to the Seoul High Military Service and filed a false report that the amount of KRW 10,941,840, and retirement allowance of KRW 15,302,665 was not paid to the Seoul High Military Service, thereby making a final and conclusive decision subject to quasi-deliberation. Since the Defendants knew of the grounds for quasi-deliberation on March 19, 2015, they sought a judgment identical to the purport of quasi-deliberation.

B. A quasi-examination suit against a final and conclusive decision shall be permitted only when there exist such grounds as stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. In a case where the grounds alleged by the quasi-examination Plaintiff do not constitute such grounds, the lawsuit for quasi

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 83Da22, Mar. 27, 1984; 87DaDa24, Dec. 8, 1987). In contrast, if the grounds alleged by the Defendants fall under any of the following subparagraphs, a lawsuit for retrial may be brought against the final judgment that has become final and conclusive, if the grounds alleged by the Defendants fall under any of the subparagraphs of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act (Grounds for Retrial).

except that the parties may appeal.