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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) on August 17, 2015, B, delegated by the Defendant, requested the Plaintiff to design and conduct a traffic impact assessment on the construction of a new building on the land of Gangseo-gu Busan, Busan, for KRW 256,00,000,000.

(2) From August 17, 2015 to September 10, 2015, the Plaintiff prepared a plan design drawing (Evidence A 3, 4, and 5) and delivered it to the Defendant.

(3) However, on April 11, 2016, the Defendant sold the above building site to another person and suspended the construction of a new building, and according to custom, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 76,80,000 (30% of the service cost) equivalent to the planning design cost out of the service cost.

B. The Defendant’s assertion did not request the Plaintiff to design the new construction of the building. However, the Defendant’s husband B only requested the Plaintiff and two other companies to prepare and estimate the provisional drawings, and the provisional drawings and estimates presented by the Plaintiff were different from those considered by the Defendant, and finally, the Plaintiff did not request the design to the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. For the purpose of the formation of a contract, the objective agreement between the parties is required for the agreement of several conflicting declarations of intention, and there is an objective agreement, all of the matters expressed in the parties’ declaration of intent should be the same. On the other hand, even if the contents of the contract are not "important" and the objective elements of the contract, in particular, when the parties expressed their intent with the intent of significant significance and expressed their intent as the requirements for the formation of the contract, the contract shall be duly and effectively

B. (See Supreme Court Decision 2001Da53059 delivered on April 11, 2003).

Even according to the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, such as the evidence No. 2, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant, in excess of requesting an estimate to the Plaintiff, requested a conclusive design, or granted a legitimate expectation or trust that the design will be requested, and that is otherwise recognized.