2. After the conclusion of the instant advertising agency contract, the Plaintiff offered advertising services to the Defendant during the period of November 2016 pursuant to the instant advertising agency contract. The Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 74,569,00 for the first service cost as to the part of the completion of the instant advertising services, and KRW 177,320,00 for the second service cost as a result of appraisal, and KRW 251,89,00 for the total amount of KRW 251,89,000 for the second service cost as to the part of the completion of the said services.

3. Determination

A. As to this part of the first service payment, the reasoning of this court is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (section 3, 2, 4, and 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance) except for the use of partial contents as follows. Thus, this part is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the first instance No. 4-5 of the first instance provides that “A party shall be liable to pay damages for delay to the interest,” “A party shall be liable to pay damages for delay calculated at each rate of 15% per annum under the Commercial Act from January 1, 2017 to June 22, 2018, which is the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the date of the decision of the court of first instance, deemed reasonable to dispute as to the existence or scope of the Defendant’s obligation to pay damages for delay, after the Plaintiff ceased to provide advertising services upon receiving a request from the Defendant for the suspension of such advertising services from the Defendant.”

(b)each description of Gap's second service charges of Gap, 10, 14, 15, 18 through 24, 35 through 38, 40 to 62, and the result of the appraisal by this court appraiser F.