1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff ordering payment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall make the plaintiff 2,500.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 25, 2012, the Defendant asserted that “D lent money to ASEAN under the Defendant’s joint and several guarantee, and acquired the above loan claims,” and filed a lawsuit claiming acquisition of the loan amount (hereinafter “subject case”) against the Defendant and E with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2012Gahap7016, the Defendant entered into a delegation contract on behalf of the Plaintiff and the subject case (hereinafter “subject case”), which is an attorney-at-law, on July 25, 2012, paid the “Attorney Fees (excluding value-added tax) according to the Supreme Court Regulations” as contingent fees, and agreed to pay the Plaintiff the contingent fees in consideration of the winning case even if the other party withdraws the lawsuit as a result of the Plaintiff’s performance, and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 5,500,00 (including

B. On August 2, 2012, according to the instant delegation contract, the Plaintiff submitted a litigation delegation form and reply to the Gwangju District Court, and argued to the effect that the Defendant was unaware of the facts indicated as joint and several sureties on the loan certificate presented as evidence by C present at the date of the first and second pleadings. The Plaintiff filed an application for F and G as a witness and proceeded with the examination procedure on November 1, 2012.

C withdrawn a lawsuit against the Defendant on November 1, 2012, and the subject case was closed on the same day, and the Gwangju District Court rendered a judgment citing the claim against E on November 22, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 to 4, 7 to 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The parties' assertion that part of the subject case against the defendant among the subject case is final and conclusive as the result of the plaintiff's lawsuit performance, and the defendant asserts that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff 1/2 of the performance fee under the delegation contract of this case equivalent to the defendant's share among the performance fee.

On this issue, the defendant is mainly the party to the case.