1. The Defendant’s handy against the Plaintiff is denied compulsory execution under the conciliation protocol No. 2012Na11324.

2. This.

1. The amount of KRW 9,653,424 that the Plaintiff remitted to the Defendant’s corporate account (Corporate Bank C) on May 30, 2013 is the sum of the amount of KRW 8,700,000 for the adjustment of the claim for return of unjust enrichment (No. 2012Na1324) with the Suwon District Court where the conciliation is concluded between two parties and the amount of delay damages.

2. The plaintiff, one of the two representative directors of the defendant who participated in the above mediation, is the plaintiff, and even if the defendant's corporate account was seized and thus the defendant's corporate account was demanded to transfer the above mediation amount to the corporate account and make payment at his/her own proposal, the plaintiff is only aware of the non-party E, the representative director of the defendant's other party, and the plaintiff, who did not have any contact with D, has no obligation to comply with the above request.

3. It does not necessarily mean that the Plaintiff’s payment of the above adjustment amount constitutes a debt for the payment of the adjustment amount. Thus, the Plaintiff’s transfer of the principal and interest of the adjustment amount to the Defendant’s corporate account cannot be denied as a legitimate repayment, since it does not necessarily mean that the Plaintiff’s payment of cash or securities to the Defendant’s business

4. The circumstance cited by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff transferred the adjustment money to the Defendant’s corporate account that the Defendant cannot collect money from the Defendant due to partial repayment of religion that the Plaintiff lost against the Defendant. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s violation of the good faith principle as to the above repayment cannot be recognized.

5. Ultimately, inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the principal and interest of the conciliation to the Defendant was fully repaid with the above remittance, compulsory execution under the above conciliation protocol is denied.