A. On July 12, 2017, the Plaintiff, an attorney-at-law, was delegated by the Defendant to act as an agent in the case of divorce, etc. between the Defendant and C (hereinafter “related case”), and drafted the following agreements with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

The amount of consolation money and property division recognized as Article 5 (Honorary) shall be 5% (in addition 10% separate), if the conciliation is concluded on the first date of the first conciliation, and if the conciliation is progress by the judgment after the failure of conciliation (in case of failure of conciliation after the first conciliation, it shall be deemed that the judgment was pronounced even if the conciliation, decision, or agreement was made before the pronouncement of the judgment during the trial process) 10% (in addition 10%).

(Provided, That the valuation of assets of which amount is difficult to be specified shall be based on an amount acknowledged by the court at the time of conclusion of pleadings or mediation)

B. On April 3, 2019 in the relevant case, the judgment rendered on April 3, 2019 to the effect that “Defendant and C shall divorce, and C shall pay consolation money to the Defendant KRW 20 million as consolation money, KRW 304,050,00 as property division, and delayed damages therefrom” (Seoul Family Court Decision 2017Dhap 35083 (principal lawsuit divorce, etc.), and division of property).

On July 1, 2019, the Defendant paid KRW 16,009,40 to the Plaintiff out of the honorariums stipulated in the instant agreement.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over recognition, entry in Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including various numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. In the judgment related to the Plaintiff, KRW 20,000 was recognized to the Defendant, and the Defendant’s share of KRW 2,957,906,459 out of the value of the property subject to division of property was recognized (=304,050,000 recognized in the Defendant’s order of KRW 2,653,856,459, which was recognized by the reasoning of the judgment).

Therefore, the Defendant’s total sum of 2,977,906,459 won (=2,957,906,459 won) KRW 20,645 won (=2,977,906,459 won) (=2,977,906,459 won) x 0.1 and below the decimal point.