1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s assertion

The plaintiff and the defendant agreed to pay 15% of the winning amount to the plaintiff according to the result of the inherited property lawsuit, while assisting the plaintiff to recover the defendant's inherited property.

The Plaintiff, while trying to bring a lawsuit to return legal reserve (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”) with Defendant 2012Gahap14476, the Plaintiff borne KRW 17,591,000 with litigation costs, such as attorney’s fees and appraisal costs, and lent KRW 1,00,000 to the Defendant.

On January 13, 2014, the conciliation was concluded that the defendant receives 330,000,000 won from the other party in the instant lawsuit.

Therefore, the Defendant paid KRW 49,500,000, which is 15% of the winning amount (=30,000,000 x 15%) and KRW 50,500,000, which is a total of KRW 1,000,000 for loans. However, the Defendant paid KRW 20,300,000.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the remaining amount of KRW 30,200,000 to the plaintiff.

Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-law Act, which intends to maintain the lawyer system by prohibiting a person, other than an attorney-at-law, from participating in the handling of legal affairs, is a mandatory law, and the legal act for the purpose of acquiring profits prescribed in Article 109 of the same Act itself is of anti-social nature and its judicial effect is denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 89Meu10514, May 11, 1990; 2009Da9843, Feb. 25, 2010; 2013Da28728, Jul. 24, 2014). The Plaintiff’s assertion is that a person, other than the Plaintiff, who is an attorney-at-law, was directly engaged in the handling of cases on behalf of the Defendant without legal knowledge, and that a person who is not an attorney-at-law was actually engaged in the handling of legal affairs on behalf of the Defendant.