1. Preliminary claim against the Defendant in the text of the judgment of the first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded at the trial.

1. The first instance court dismissed the main claim and accepted part of the conjunctive claim.

However, the plaintiff appealed only for the preliminary claim partially dismissed, and did not appeal for the primary claim.

The defendant stated in the purport of appeal by the complaint "the purport of appeal by the complaint" that "the judgment of the first instance is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed," and the defendant also appealed the main claim, but the defendant has no interest in appeal by winning all the main claim.

It is reasonable to view that the purport of the defendant's appeal is the same as that of the above appeal.

Therefore, except the primary claim, only the conjunctive claim is the object of this Court's trial.

2. Basic facts

A. (1) On November 11, 2004, the Defendant’s mother F delegated the Plaintiff, an attorney-at-law, an agent for a lawsuit claiming ownership transfer registration with respect to the Plaintiff’s share of 6/8 square meters in Gyeonggi-do Gincheon-gun Gincheon-gun (hereinafter “instant land before the instant partition”) and the Plaintiff, an agent for a lawsuit claiming ownership transfer registration with respect to the Plaintiff’s share of 81,025 square meters in Seoul Special Metropolitan City H large 131.8 square meters and its own

At the time, F agreed to bear the expenses for delegated affairs such as stamp fee and service fee, and to pay the plaintiff 10,700,000 won with the retainer, and 10% of the economic profit from winning the contract with the success fee.

On the same day, the defendant guaranteed F's joint and several guarantee of F's expenses for handling delegated affairs and for paying contingent fees.

(2) As a legal representative of F, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “instant lawsuit”) against F with respect to each of the above real estate by this Court No. 2004Gada396410, and the conciliation was concluded on February 2, 2005, that “F and I shall change the name of F/8 shares of each of the above real estate in the name of F/I,” which is “F and I, in the name of F/8 shares of each of the above real estate.”

(3) On February 15, 2005, F, the nominal owner of 2/8 shares in the land before the instant partition, was the same according to the registration of correction under the above conciliation.