1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 24, 2015, the Plaintiff and the Defendant, an attorney-at-law, delegated the Plaintiff’s disciplinary case to the Defendant, and the Defendant entered into a delegation agreement with respect to the above disciplinary case, which represents future teachers’ appeals review committee, administrative litigation, and civil litigation (hereinafter “instant delegation agreement”) and paid 11,00,000 won (including value-added tax) to the Defendant on July 27, 201.

B. On November 16, 2015, the Plaintiff cancelled the instant delegation contract and demanded the Defendant to refund the said KRW 11,000,000 to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 6, 7, 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff delegated the Defendant with the affairs of responding to the instant case regarding the disciplinary proceedings against the Plaintiff of the University of well-known Women, who was working for the Plaintiff, and the affairs of filing a teacher’s petition, administrative litigation, and civil litigation. The Defendant breached the fiduciary duty as the mandatory, and rescinded the instant delegation contract on November 16, 2015, on the ground that the Defendant faithfully performed the duties of responding to the disciplinary action, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to return the said appointment fee of KRW 11,00,000 to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant faithfully performed his duty by sending a certificate of content to the president of the University of Lifemen, Science and Technology pursuant to the instant delegation agreement. The Plaintiff’s notice of cancellation of the instant delegation agreement is inappropriate, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim cannot be complied with.

3. Determination

A. As to the cancellation of the Plaintiff’s instant delegation contract, one mandatary failed to perform his/her obligation under the delegation contract.

at all times the mandators may not rescind the delegation contract on the ground of the default of the obligation, but if it is possible for the mandatary to perform the obligation under the delegation contract, the mandator shall set a reasonable period against the mandatary.