1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 207,173,00 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from January 27, 2018 to the day of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 3, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into an urban management plan with the Defendant, which mainly covers the change of the project site, which is a Class-I general residential area, into a Class-II general residential area in relation to the F apartment construction project implemented by the Defendant in Yangsan-si E, and entered into an implementation service contract with KRW 380,000,000 (excluding value-added tax).

The contents of the plaintiff's task set forth in the above service contract are basic surveys (survey of current status, geological survey, forest survey), determination of urban management plan (change), change of specific use area, permission for development activities, formulation of implementation plan of urban planning facilities, response to consultation and deliberation by the Urban Planning Committee, etc.

B. After that, on June 29, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a modified contract with the content that the contract amount of the above service contract shall be increased to KRW 480,000,00 (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant service contract,” in total of the original service contract and the foregoing modified contract.

The Plaintiff performed services related to the amendment of the urban management plan, authorization of implementation plan, permission for development activities, etc. in accordance with the instant service contract.

However, when the Defendant’s failure to obtain registration of housing construction project and making it difficult for the Plaintiff to perform services, such as the application for the approval of the housing construction project plan, the Plaintiff, around October 2016, notified the Defendant of the termination of the instant service contract and demanding the settlement of the service cost.

The degree and rate of progress of services performed by the Plaintiff according to the instant service contract shall be as specified in attached Table 1.

E. Around December 11, 2015, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff the service cost of KRW 76,000,000,000 to the contract deposit.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 8, appraiser G's appraisal result, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of the claim