1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On November 26, 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract on the appointment of the Plaintiff as the Defendant’s defense counsel (hereinafter “instant contract”) in relation to the 2014 type No. 27323 and two other cases (hereinafter “instant criminal case”).

The contract of this case has the following provisions.

◎ 제6조[착수보수] ① 피고는 이 사건 계약의 성립과 동시에 원고에게 착수보수로 1,100만 원(부가가치세 포함)을 지급한다.

◎ 제7조[성과보수]

(a) The phase of trial on contingent remuneration;

1. When a judgment of innocence, dismissal of public prosecution, or acquittal is pronounced: 10 million won; and

2. When a judgment of suspended sentence is rendered: 500,000 won;

3. When a judgment of a fine is sentenced: 330,000 won.

4. When a judgment of suspension of execution or higher is sentenced: No contingent remuneration shall be paid;

B. On November 19, 2014, the prosecution brought a public prosecution against the instant criminal case with respect to the Defendant’s High Court of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “Court of the first instance”) and proceeded with the procedure of trial.

(J) Goyang Branch 2014 High Court 2014 High Court 2522 High Court 2015 High Court 544, High Court 2015 High Court 2607 (Joint) 2015 High Court 2607 (Joint) hereinafter referred to as “instant criminal trial”).

Plaintiff

C Attorney at the Supreme Court, on December 5, 2014, submitted a defense counsel appointment system to the court of first instance, and served as the defendant's defense counsel on the criminal trial of this case.

On November 11, 2015, the criminal trial of this case was concluded on November 11, 2015. At that time, Nonparty D’s law firm (LLC) was additionally appointed as the defendant’s counsel, and the application for the appointment of counsel and the resumption of argument was submitted to the court of first instance on December 2, 2015.

Accordingly, the argument has been resumed and the further proceedings have been concluded on February 24, 2016. On May 20, 2016, the court of first instance rendered a judgment of the court of first instance on May 20, 2016 that "the use of private documents among the facts charged in the instant case, the use of private documents, and each embezzlement related to No. 110 No. 110 of the instant case, shall be acquitted, and the establishment of the instant case.