1. All appeals filed by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The appeal costs.

1. The reason why the court states this part of the basic facts is the same as that of paragraph (a) of Article 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the judgment on the claim of the principal suit are as follows: (a) the “14 billion won” of the judgment of the first instance court is “10 million won”; (b) the “15 million won” of the 6th page “13 is “15 million won”; and (c) the part of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in Article 2-b, (d) of the Civil Procedure Act, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Judgment on a counterclaim

A. The Defendant’s assertion delegated the Plaintiff a criminal complaint to file a criminal complaint against C’s gambling. C’s gambling merely does not assist the Defendant’s divorce lawsuit, and the Defendant’s non-prosecution disposition (e.g., dismissal), and the Plaintiff concluded a large amount of additional remuneration agreement exceeding the ordinary amount for preservative measures not deemed a separate delegated business.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the retainer fee of KRW 5,50,000 on the ground of the Defendant’s filing of a complaint as unjust enrichment (the grounds for the repayment of the retainer fee of an accusation explicitly asserted by the Defendant, but inasmuch as the Plaintiff entered into the instant delegation agreement with the Defendant on the behalf of the Defendant, received the retainer fee of KRW 5,500,00 as the retainer fee of the accusation, and filed a complaint with C in gambling in accordance with the delegation content, the retainer fee cannot be deemed as unjust enrichment without any legal grounds, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion in this part shall be deemed as seeking liability for damages arising from the nonperformance of obligation on the ground of a preservative measure).

(b) To examine the part of the retainer fee for accusation, the attorney-at-law shall be based on professional legal knowledge and experience in carrying out the delegated affairs in light of the public interest and expertise of his duties.