1. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs, in the conclusion of a delegation contract by proxy and the progress of the principal lawsuit, are the deceased I’s bereaved family members who died due to cerebrovassis caused by an abortion accident on May 26, 2013 while hospitalized in the HH’s hospital located in Yeonsu-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

On July 2013, the Plaintiffs entered into a delegation contract with the Defendant, an attorney-at-law, on behalf of the court of first instance regarding the legal representation of the said hospital (the aforementioned hospital’s representative shall not be paid in advance, KRW 2,00,000,00,000,000 and the service fees, and no contingent fees).

The Defendant, on August 13, 2013, specified the other party as J individual in submitting a complaint for damages compensation lawsuit under this Court Decision 2013Da65665, but, on March 2014 in the course of the lawsuit, became aware that the legal operating entity of the above hospital was a medical corporation K (hereinafter “foreign Foundation”) and received a written decision of acceptance from the above court on April 11, 2014 upon filing an application for correction of the Defendant with the non-party foundation.

On August 14, 2014, the first instance court rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff C to the effect that “The Foundation shall pay KRW 9,230,769,769, and its delay damages to the Plaintiff C, respectively,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. While the property status of the non-party foundation, the non-party foundation owned the above-mentioned land building, the land site and the above-ground building, etc. of the non-party foundation in Gyeong-gun, Sung-do, Sung-do.

With respect to the real estate owned by the non-party foundation, the establishment of additional collateral security as of April 8, 2014 before and after the time of the above decision of correction of the defendant, and the seizure and compulsory auction by many creditors were enforced consecutively.

In June 2014, the defendant identified the real estate status of the non-party foundation through the perusal of the register of the non-party foundation. However, on behalf of the plaintiffs, the above real estate is subject to provisional attachment procedure.