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

1. The defendant is a person who purchased a C apartment D unit (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the plaintiff was an attorney-at-law belonging to the law firm E.

In around 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract with Law Firm E for the delegation of a lawsuit with respect to the cancellation of the apartment sale contract in this case, compensation for damages, claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, etc. (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”). Among them, the main contents on the contingent remuneration, etc. are as follows.

Article 1 (Scope of Acceptance) (1) Case : Case C (Cancellation and Termination of Contract for Sale in Lots, Compensation for Damages, Return of Unjust Enrichment, etc.) Case : Case 4) Case : The defendant shall pay to Law Firm remuneration and costs of lawsuit as follows.

(i)the success fee of 200,000 won (including surtax) (2) the contingent remuneration;

1. 6% (including surtax; hereinafter the same shall apply) of "the difference between the market price and the appraised price of an apartment at the apartment sale price" when accepting a claim for cancellation or cancellation of a contract;

2. When accepting a claim for damages or a claim for reduction of the sale price, the amount calculated at the following rates by applying the following rates to each economic benefit value - 7% of the economic benefit value - 8% of the sale price in excess of 5% but not more than 10% of the sale price - 9% of the economic benefit value in excess of 10% of the sale price - 15% of the sale price: 10% of the economic benefit value in excess of 15%:

3. Time of payment: The Plaintiff, as an attorney at law firm E, filed a lawsuit against FF Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F, etc.”) on behalf of the buyers of the instant apartment, including the Defendant, on February 1, 2013 from the said court by filing a lawsuit (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”) on behalf of the buyers of the instant apartment, including the Defendant, and paid the amount equivalent to 12% of the purchase price to each of the Defendant, etc. on February 1, 2013.