1. The instant lawsuit was concluded on June 15, 201 as conciliation.

2. The defendant dated June 23, 2017.

1. On June 15, 2017, at the first conciliation date, the fact that the plaintiff and the defendant respectively present at each of the above cases and the conciliation has been achieved is significant in this court.

(1) In the written objection filed on June 23, 2017, “Defendant B agreed to the conciliation with the Jinju District Court on June 15, 2017, but the Plaintiff refused to apply for the principal registration after provisional registration cancellation. After the agreement, the Defendant recognized the provisional registration cancellation agreement or the agreement to cancel the provisional registration cancellation and sought a decision of the full bench on the cancellation of provisional registration.” However, it cannot be said that the conciliation was not completed or the conciliation was not completed due to the following reasons. In the written application for the resumption of pleadings filed on July 13, 2017, it cannot be said that “In the conciliation, it was impossible for the Defendant to normally proceed with the trial under the circumstance that the conciliation was not established, and it cannot be said that there was no evidence to conclude that the conciliation was completed again or that conciliation was completed under the same circumstances as the Plaintiff’s decision, and it cannot be said that there was no reason to conclude that the conciliation was concluded under the same circumstance as the Plaintiff’s decision again.”