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

1. As to this part of recognized facts, the corresponding part of the grounds for the judgment of the first instance shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

(However, in Part 3 of Part 3 of the Judgment of the first instance court, the phrase "if there is the enemy against the U.S. visa" in Part 16 "B" means 15. U.S. visa of the person himself and his family, the type, person, person, date, time, and place of non-entry refusal" in the entry cancellation and refusal of the U.S., and the record "in column" in Part 3 of Part 4.2. The judgment on the cause of the claim is as follows:

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, while consulting the Defendant’s employees of the first instance trial Co-Defendant B, the Defendant’s employees, the Plaintiff was rejected on the grounds of submission of a forged employment certificate, several times, and thereafter, the Plaintiff concluded an immigration-related contract with the Defendant, following the Plaintiff’s reply that B may receive a visa without any problem.

The plaintiff's spouse C prepared an application in the Korean language for the submission of the application for visa (DS-260) and asked B about how to state the items on the non-self-refluence power, and hear from B as a whole, the plaintiff's spouse asked B to answer faithfully in the interview and followed it.

However, in the course of the interview, the Plaintiff was asked by the consular official about why the part of non-self-determination was distorted. Ultimately, the Plaintiff rejected the issuance of non-employment visa on the ground of “false statement.”

The defendant did not grasp the qualification of the plaintiff's employment immigration visa in performing the immigration immigration duties through B, and did not properly grasp the qualification of the plaintiff's employment immigration visa application, resulting in the plaintiff's rejection of issuance of the plaintiff's visa, thereby causing damage to the plaintiff.

Since the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for damages caused by nonperformance, the amount equivalent to the fees, etc. paid by the plaintiff shall be KRW 26,510,231.