1. Compulsory execution based on the mediation protocol for the defendant's branch of Suwon District Court 2018Kadan57372 against the plaintiff is 2.

1. The fact of recognition;

By April 30, 2019, the Plaintiff shall pay 35 million won to the Defendant at the same time along with the relocation of six on-ground graves, such as Echeon-si D (hereinafter referred to as “instant grave”).

B. The Defendant received KRW 35 million from the Plaintiff until April 30, 2019, and simultaneously rejected the instant grave from the Plaintiff.

A. On March 29, 2019, conciliation was established between the Plaintiff and the Defendant in Suwon District Court 2018Kadan57372 (hereinafter “instant conciliation”).

The contents of the instant protocol concerning the instant case are as follows.

On May 4, 2019, the Defendant sent the instant grave to the Plaintiff.

B. On May 24, 2019, the Defendant filed an application for a compulsory auction (hereinafter “instant auction”) against the Plaintiff’s real estate with a claim of KRW 35 million under the instant conciliation protocol (hereinafter “instant claim or obligation”).

On June 13, 2019, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 35 million in the name of repayment of the instant debt (hereinafter “the instant deposit”) with the deposited person as the Defendant in Suwon District Court, Sung-nam Branch, 2019, the Defendant reserved an objection on June 26, 2019 and paid the instant deposit.

C. The Defendant spent 2,493,000 won for the instant auction (192,200 won for delivery of KRW 4,500,000 for revenue stamps of KRW 192,200 for the first auction proceeds of KRW 1,209,50 for the first auction proceeds of KRW 1,000 for the registration application fees of KRW 3,000 for the acquisition tax of KRW 84,00 for the acquisition tax of KRW 3,00).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff fully repaid the instant debt due to the deposit of this case.

Even if some debts remain, the Plaintiff’s damage claim arising from the delay of the Defendant’s transfer of the grave of this case as an automatic claim is equal to the Defendant’s claim against the Plaintiff.