A. The Plaintiff is a company with the objective of investigating, surveying, planning, designing, supervising industrial complexes, etc., and the Defendant is a company with the objective of constructing and selling general industrial complex development projects.

B. On June 11, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant service contract”) with the Plaintiff to provide services, such as the establishment of an industrial complex plan and the preparation of an investment intent, related to the approval of the project (hereinafter “instant project”) in the amount of KRW 1,100,000 (excluding value-added tax) with the Plaintiff in order to carry out the industrial complex development project at KRW 157, Yangsan-dong, Yangsan-si. The main contents of the contract (hereinafter “instant service contract”) written at the time are as shown in the attached sheet.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. On July 31, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the rescission of the instant service contract, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 532,621,100 after deducting KRW 121,00,000,000 paid by the Defendant from the total service cost for the completed portion at the time of the said rescission (including value-added tax) from the total of KRW 653,621,100.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff was unable to properly perform the services under the instant service contract, and was notified by Yangsan City that the Plaintiff was unable to perform the instant service contract within the service period due to such circumstances, etc., and the Defendant was notified that the instant service contract will be cancelled.

Accordingly, the instant service contract was rescinded due to the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the Plaintiff, and thereafter, the Plaintiff did not perform services under the said service contract any longer.

Therefore, the defendant cannot pay the service cost for the result other than the written investment intent asserted by the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. The instant case.