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. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in multi-family housing management business, etc.

Article 2 (Entrusted Management Affairs) (1) The management affairs entrusted by the defendant to the "B" (Plaintiff) shall be as follows:

1. Affairs of any other management entity referred to in any subparagraph of Article 63 (1) of the Multi-Family Housing Management Act and any subparagraph of Article 29 of the Rules;

2. In addition to the duties prescribed in subparagraph 1, Article 11 (Payment of Commissions for Entrusted Management) of the Multi-Family Housing Management Act, the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and the Enforcement Rule shall pay to “B” the entrusted management fees of KRW 334,956 per month (excluding value-added tax).

Article 12 (Period of Contract) (1) The term of contract shall be from April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2020 (three years).

Article 13 (Termination of Contracts) (1) "A" and "B" may terminate a contract in any of the following cases, and may claim damages for such termination:

4. When Gap or Eul has failed to perform the contract without any special reason. <2> When Gap and Eul intend to terminate the contract pursuant to paragraph 1, they shall notify the other party in writing 30 days prior to the termination of the contract.

B. On March 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a collective housing consignment management contract (hereinafter “instant management contract”) with the Defendant regarding the Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”). The main contents are as follows.

C. On June 26, 2018, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a letter to the effect that “The Plaintiff would terminate the instant management contract by June 30, 2018, inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s employees suffered losses due to the error in the estimation of construction works at the joint entrance of the Plaintiff employees, the erroneous size of rollyl chlorides, the delay in the purchase of cleaning machine, and the purchase amount on the purchase draft of the purchase draft document, etc., are inconsistent with the estimate amount.”

Accordingly, on June 26, 2018, the plaintiff approved the representative of the defendant's joint entrance to the defendant.