1. The Defendant’s compulsory execution against the Plaintiff based on the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission’s protocol No. 2014, Seoul 2014, and 3299.

Facts of recognition

From April 3, 2014 to November 18, 2014, the defendant joined C operated by the plaintiff and served as the plaintiff's execution engineer.

The defendant asserted that he was abused, abused, and unfairly dismissed from the plaintiff, and filed an application for unfair dismissal with the Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission(Seoul Regional Labor Relations Commission) No. 2014Da3299.

On January 15, 2015, in the procedure of remedy for unfair dismissal, the Plaintiff and the Defendant terminated the labor relationship as of November 18, 2014. The Plaintiff and the Defendant paid 3.5 million won to the Defendant by January 22, 2015 with the amount of settlement agreement. By January 22, 2015, all complaints filed by the Defendant against the Plaintiff were withdrawn by January 22, 2015. In the event that the said settlement agreement is implemented, the Plaintiff and the Defendant have concluded a settlement with the effect that they will not raise any objection by any means of civil, criminal, administrative, or any other means in connection with the termination of the said labor relationship. As to such settlement, the said settlement was drafted pursuant to Article 16-3(3) and (4) of the Labor Relations Commission Act (hereinafter “instant protocol”).

The Plaintiff did not pay money under the instant protocol of conciliation by January 22, 2015, and the Defendant, on February 16, 2015, issued an order of seizure and collection as Seoul Eastern District Court 2015TTTT2181 as to the Plaintiff’s deposit claim against Han Bank Co., Ltd. by using the instant protocol of conciliation as the title of execution.

After that, the Plaintiff may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff remitted total of KRW 3.5 million to the Defendant, including KRW 1.8 million on April 9, 2015, ② KRW 2.7 million on July 10, 2015.

[Grounds for recognition] Each of Gap 1, 2, 3-1, and 3-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

Judgment

The Plaintiff asserts that, as the cause of the instant claim, since the Plaintiff fully repaid the amount of KRW 3.5 million based on the instant protocol of conciliation, compulsory execution based on the instant protocol of conciliation shall not be permissible, and that the seizure and collection order based on the instant protocol of conciliation should also be revoked.

According to the above facts, the plaintiff was found to have been guilty.