1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C is the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2020sY34661 decided May 20, 2020

1. The court rendered a decision to refer the instant case to conciliation on March 25, 2020 by the Plaintiff and the Defendant C on March 25, 2020, and in conciliation proceedings (Seoul Western District Court 2020s.3461), “The Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff 67,50,000 won until June 30, 2020. The Defendants shall pay to the Plaintiff the remaining amount due to delay plus the amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment. The Plaintiff shall waive the remainder of the claim. It was a substitute decision for conciliation; the Plaintiff was made on May 22, 2020; Defendant C did not receive the above decision on May 25, 2020, but Defendant C did not receive the above decision on May 25, 202, and the fact that the Plaintiff and Defendant C did not have filed within 14 days from the record is clear.

The lawsuit of this case is not an essential co-litigation which requires a consolidated confirmation of a legal relationship, but an ordinary co-litigation. In a decision substituting the above conciliation, a separate confirmation is denied in a decision substituting the above conciliation, or in light of the purport of the decision, such as the case where the matters prescribed in the said decision coordinates interests among co-litigants on the premise that they form a common legal relationship, it does not constitute a violation of equity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da57872, Jul. 10, 2008). Of the lawsuit of this case, the part between the plaintiff and the defendant in this case between the plaintiff and the defendant was terminated by a final decision substituting the above conciliation on June 9, 2020, which is the day after the period for filing

Meanwhile, even if a decision was made on June 19, 2020 to revoke a decision in lieu of the above conciliation on the grounds that service rendered against Defendant B was impossible, a decision in lieu of the above conciliation was made on June 9, 2020 by the Plaintiff and Defendant C, which became final and conclusive as the time limit for filing an objection, and became effective as a judicial compromise (Article 34(4) of the Judicial Conciliation of Civil Disputes Act).