beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Status 1) C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”)
) The Incheon D Apartment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment”).
(E) is the contractor and the truster of a new project and the E (hereinafter “E”)
(2) On January 3, 2010, the Plaintiff is a person who purchased the instant apartment F from E, and the Plaintiff is a former attorney-at-law of law firm G.
B. On September 26, 201, the Defendant entered into a delegation contract of lawsuit with law firms on the cancellation or cancellation of the instant apartment sale contract, compensation for damages, return of unjust enrichment, etc. (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”) and the content of the agreement on the contingent remuneration, etc. are as follows.
Article 1 (Scope of Acceptance) (1) : He case of so-called H (Cancellation and Termination of Sales Contract, Compensation for Damages, Return of Unjust Enrichment, etc.) (4) Acceptance : Article 3 (Remuneration) A (Defendant) of the entire litigation and preservation litigation in the first instance trial of the above case shall pay remuneration and litigation costs to Eul (Law Firm G) as follows:
(i)the success fee of 200,000 won (including surtax) (2) the contingent remuneration;
1.The amount calculated at the following rates by applying differential rates by economic gains value - below 5 per cent: 7 per cent (including value added taxes; hereinafter the same shall apply) of the economic gains value - 8 per cent but more than 10 per cent of the sale price: 8 per cent of the economic gains value - 9 per cent of the economic gains value of more than 10 per cent but not more than 15 per cent of the sale price - 10 per cent of the sale price:
2. Time of payment: When money is received;
C. 1) The Plaintiff, as an attorney at law firm G, is seeking a refund, etc. of the sale price against E and C on behalf of the buyer of the apartment of this case including the Defendant, on behalf of the buyer of the apartment of this case (hereinafter “previous lawsuit”).
E and C respectively from the above court on February 1, 2013.