1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a person who purchased Incheon C apartment unit No. D (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the plaintiff was an attorney-at-law belonging to the law firm E.

Article 1(1) (Scope of Appointment: (2) Other party of the so-called C case (e.g. cancellation and cancellation of the sale contract, compensation for damages, claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, etc.): The indication of the competent court, institution, etc. of the apartment seller, Korea, Incheon Metropolitan City, Korea Land and Housing Corporation, Incheon Urban Development Corporation, etc. (3) the competent court, institution, etc.: The scope of acceptance of the case: the Incheon District Court or the Seoul District Court (4) all of the merits litigation and preservation litigation of the case: the amount of 200,000 won (including surtax)

1.The amount calculated at the following rates, applying differential rates by the value of economic benefits - below 5%: 7% of the value of economic benefits (including surtax; hereinafter the same shall apply) - The value of economic benefits exceeding 5% and not more than 10%: 8% of the value of economic benefits - the value of economic benefits exceeding 10% but not more than 15%: 9% of the value of economic benefits exceeding 15%: 10% of the value of economic benefits:

2. Time of payment: Receipt of money.

B. Around 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract for delegation of a lawsuit (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”) with a law firm E, which stipulates the scope of acceptance and remuneration as follows.

C. A total of 726 buyers of the instant apartment, such as the Defendant, filed a lawsuit seeking the return of the sale price (hereinafter “related lawsuit”) against F Co., Ltd., G and H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant construction works, etc.”) (hereinafter “the instant construction works, etc.”) which is the contractor for the new construction and sale of the instant apartment, and the law firm E represented all 726 buyers of the relevant lawsuit at the first instance court under the delegation contract with the buyers, such as the instant delegation contract, and the Plaintiff, as an attorney at the law firm E, performed the relevant lawsuit.

The first instance court of the related lawsuit is the case on February 1, 2013.