1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is a person who purchased Incheon apartment unit No. 3 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”), and the plaintiff was an attorney-at-law belonging to the law firm E.

Article 1(1) (Scope of Deposits: (2) Other party of the so-called C apartment case (e.g. cancellation and termination of the sale contract, damages, unjust enrichment claim, etc.): The indication of the competent court, agency, etc. of the apartment seller, Korea, Incheon Metropolitan City, Korea Land and Housing Corporation, Incheon Urban Development Corporation, etc. (3) the competent court, agency, etc.: the scope of acceptance of the case: the Incheon District Court or the Seoul District Court (4) the case: the first instance court of the case, and the first instance, Article 3(1) (1) of all the litigation and the preservation litigation

1.The amount calculated at the following rates by applying differential rates by economic gains value - below 5 per cent: 7 per cent of the economic gains (including surtax; hereinafter the same shall apply) - The economic gains value exceeding 5 per cent but not exceeding 10 per cent: 8 per cent of the economic gains value - the economic gains value exceeding 10 per cent but not exceeding 15 per cent of the parcelling-out price: 9 per cent of the economic gains value exceeding 15 per cent: 10 per cent of the economic gains value.

2. Time of payment: Receipt of money.

B. On September 26, 2011, the Defendant entered into a contract with Law Firm E for delegation of a lawsuit (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”) stipulating the scope of acceptance and remuneration as follows.

C. The total number of buyers of the instant apartment, including the Defendant, filed a lawsuit seeking the refund of sale price, etc. (hereinafter “related lawsuit”) against F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) and G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) (hereinafter “the instant apartment”) which is a contractor for the new construction and sale of the instant apartment, and E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the instant lawsuit”). In accordance with the delegation contract with the buyer of the content identical to the instant delegation contract, E Co., Ltd., on behalf of 354 of the total petitioners at the first instance court of the relevant lawsuit in accordance with the delegation contract with the buyer of the instant apartment, and the Plaintiff performed the relevant lawsuit as an attorney-at-law of E Co., Ltd., and the first instance court of the relevant lawsuit jointly and severally conducted the relevant lawsuit.