1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 18,478,904 per each of the Defendants against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from May 15, 2019 to May 2020.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 5, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the return of the deposit amount against Law Firm G, and on February 5, 2018, the conciliation was conducted as follows with Seoul Central District Court No. 2017 money621503 (2017Na767555).

prescribed provisions

1. The Defendant shall pay a gold of KRW 40,000,000 to the Plaintiff, and all of them shall be divided into ten times from March 2018 to December 10, 2018 and paid KRW 4,00,000 as of the end of each month from March 2018 to December 2018.

Provided, That where the defendant is liable for the installment payment of the above amount three times, the defendant shall lose the benefit of the deadline and shall pay the remainder of the amount and the damages for delay at the rate of 10% per annum from the day following the day of loss of the benefit of the deadline to the day of full payment.

B. Law Firm G: (a) on April 2, 2018, KRW 2,000,000 for the Plaintiff; (b) on the same year

2.2.2,00,000 won, and the same year.

6.1. 2,00,000 won, and the same year.

7. 26.4,00,000 won, and the same year.

8. A total of KRW 14,000,000 paid each of KRW 31.4,000,000, but thereafter, it did not pay KRW 26,000,000 until the filing of the instant lawsuit.

C. The Defendants are attorneys-at-law of law firm G.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) Article 58(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act provides that "Except as provided in this Act, the provisions pertaining to partnership companies in the Commercial Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to law firms," and an attorney-at-law of law firms falls under a partner of an unlimited partnership company in the Commercial Act, and Article 212(1) of the Commercial Act provides that "each partner shall be jointly and severally liable when the company is unable to fully pay its obligations with its assets." According to the above facts of recognition, since a law firm G appears to fall under the case where it is impossible for the plaintiff to fully pay its obligations to the plaintiff with its assets, the defendants shall pay to the plaintiff as a member of G law firm the balance of obligations under each of the above mediation protocol and damages for delay.