1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid:

1. Basic facts

A. On May 1, 2013, the Defendant appointed the head of the law firm as a legal representative and filed a lawsuit claiming damages under the Suwon District Court 2013Gahap9119 against C (hereinafter “other party”).

B. On September 6, 2013, the Defendant concluded a delegation contract with D on the instant case (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”) with D, and paid KRW 10,000,000 as starting fees.

In addition, the delegation contract of this case contains the following contents as to the performance remuneration (hereinafter referred to as the “instant performance remuneration agreement”) and the bottom part of the delegation contract of this case, all of which are printed in the same text.

Article 7 (Remuneration for Performance)

(a) When the delegated affairs of contingent remuneration have succeeded to a judgment, judicial or extra-judicial reconciliation (including a decision of recommending reconciliation), mediation (including a decision in lieu of mediation), etc., the contingent remuneration shall be paid in accordance with the following classification:

(1) In cases of winning all the winnings: Amount equivalent to 10% of the value of economic benefits acquired by winnings (hereinafter referred to as "value-added tax"): 3 Omitted.

(b) In the case of winning: The following shall be regarded as winning, and the above A:

the contingent remuneration set forth in paragraph shall be paid.

(1) Where a mandatary voluntarily waives or recognizes a claim, withdraws a lawsuit, or withdraws an appeal after he/she has invested a considerable effort for the management of entrusted affairs. <2> Where the other party waives or recognizes a claim, withdraws a lawsuit, or withdraws an appeal due to a mandatary's performance of litigation (in cases where the other party reduces the purport of claim or appeal due to such reason, it shall be deemed that the reduced part has been successful).

C. Of the reasons under sub-paragraph 1 of the preceding paragraph, the mandator does not exist.