A. On September 12, 2012, the Defendant agreed to entrust the Plaintiff with the litigation agency affairs in the Gwangju High Court 201Kahap13397 case, which was the appellate court in the case of unjust enrichment against the Defendant, and to pay the Plaintiff an amount equivalent to 5% of the economic profit accrued therefrom as a successful fee if the delegated affairs were successful, and then to pay an additional amount of KRW 100 million.

B. The Defendant’s appeal was accepted in the foregoing Gwangju High Court case 2012Na4977, and the judgment of the first instance was revoked on August 28, 2013, and the Defendant won the Defendant by dismissing C’s claim.

(B) The appeal filed by C was dismissed on December 27, 2013 by Supreme Court Decision 2013Da69408.

On September 4, 2013, the Defendant issued to the Plaintiff a notarial deed, which is the issuer, the Defendant, the par value of KRW 115,00,000, and the Plaintiff’s promissory note, as the Plaintiff’s certificate of 2164 on September 4, 2013.

On the other hand, on December 18, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for individual rehabilitation with the Gwangju District Court 2015Da41305, and received the decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures on May 26, 2016 and the decision to authorize the repayment plan on July 18, 2016. The Plaintiff’s contingent fee-related claims are not included in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors.

[Reasons for Recognition] The entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, a significant fact in this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. With respect to the plaintiff's assertion of the parties, the defendant sought payment of the above KRW 115,00,000 with the contingent fees, the defendant is a conditional agreement that the defendant shall pay the contingent fees upon the completion of all the procedures (i.e., recovery) in favor of the defendant in the relevant lawsuit. In light of the course of a series of litigation, the plaintiff is only a winning in the form, and it does not fail to secure any amount in substance, and therefore there is no obligation to pay the contingent fees agreed with the plaintiff.