1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. On June 18, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that it is necessary to provide legal consultation and advice as the victim of the fraud case, and concluded an advisory contract with the Defendant who is an attorney-at-law in return for continuous legal consultation and assistance, on the condition that if a subsequent criminal complaint is filed, an additional amount of KRW 2 million shall be paid, and two million shall be paid to the Defendant. The Defendant did not properly provide legal advice and assistance agreed upon with the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant can recover the advisory fee of KRW 2 million which is unfairly accepted.

2. According to the evidence No. 1 of the judgment as to the cause of the claim, even though it is recognized that the Plaintiff paid KRW 2 million to the Defendant on June 18, 2013, it is insufficient to readily conclude that the Defendant failed to perform legal advice and assistance that the Plaintiff promised to receive advisory fees even if considering all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, according to the records of this case, the defendant provided the plaintiff with advice by e-mail, telephone call, etc. for a considerable period after the consultation agreement with the plaintiff. However, it is only recognized that the plaintiff did not receive additional advice while communicating with the defendant on November 28, 2013.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to accept.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.