1. The Defendant’s KRW 417,110,244 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from October 26, 2018 to March 22, 2019, and the following.

1. Basic facts

A. A. D and the Defendant were the legal couple who married in 1999. On February 3, 2014, D filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 100 million for divorce and consolation money and KRW 9,566,922,625 for division of property (Seoul Family Court E) and the Defendant also filed a counterclaim against D seeking a divorce, etc. on October 22, 2014 (Seoul Family Court Decision 2014Dhap30763, hereinafter the above principal lawsuit and counterclaim are collectively referred to as “related case” (the Seoul Family Court Decision 2014Dhap30763, hereinafter the above principal lawsuit and counterclaim).

2) A: The Seoul Family Court case name E: The Seoul Family Court case name of the case: (Defendant B) the other party to the case in the first instance court of the case in the above indication case. Article 1 (Purpose) A concludes a delegation contract with respect to the handling of the case in the first instance court of the case in the above indication case as follows. Article 1 (Purpose) A shall handle the case in the above indication case in the above indication case (hereinafter referred to as “entrusted affairs”).

Article 6 (Advanced Remuneration) (1) A shall pay to B a gold million won (value-added tax separate from the commencement remuneration) at the same time as the delegation contract is concluded. Article 7 (Performance Remuneration)

(a) (1) When the methods of calculating contingent remuneration (including decisions recommending reconciliation), mediation (including decisions in lieu of mediation), etc. are successful on the basis of a judgment, judicial or extra-judicial settlement (including decisions recommending reconciliation), the contingent remuneration shall be paid in accordance with the following classification:

(2) When the judgment of the court of first instance is rendered at the time of the judgment (where the judgment of the court of second instance) at the time of the judgment of the court of second instance (excluding value-added tax), an amount equivalent to 5% of the value of economic gains acquired by winning a winning case, at the time

(b) Where it is deemed that he/she won: He/she shall report it to the winning in the following cases, and pay the amount of the contingent remuneration prescribed in the above paragraph (a):

(4) Where A terminates a delegation contract without justifiable grounds after he/she puts reasonable efforts to manage delegated affairs, or where B terminates a delegation contract under Article 9, B shall be based on an attorney-at-law who has been in charge of the initial litigation of the relevant case.