1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 26, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a consulting service agreement with the Defendant on the implementation of the project, such as administrative affairs, with respect to the new construction project of the main complex of Yongsan-si, the main complex of the Yongsan-si, with the Defendant, and was paid KRW 100 million as advisory fees and remuneration titles. The Plaintiff agreed to preferentially pay the sale fees after the completion of the new building.

B. At present, the completion of the instant new construction development project is already completed and part of a commercial building was sold in lots, and the Defendant paid to the Plaintiff KRW 50 million at the advisory fee from December 10, 2012 to September 30, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the advisory fee of KRW 50 million which is unpaid and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from June 3, 2015 to September 30, 2015 under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment.

(A) The Plaintiff claimed payment of damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the day after the delivery of the original payment order to the day of full payment. However, since the statutory interest rate applicable after October 1, 2015 was amended by Presidential Decree No. 26553, Sept. 25, 2015; and the interest rate applied after October 1, 2015 was changed to 15% per annum, the part in excess is without merit).

A. The Defendant’s assertion and the Plaintiff’s agreement on advisory fees between the Defendant and the Plaintiff are subject to a resolution of the Defendant’s board of directors as an act of assuming obligations by the Defendant. As such, the Defendant’s conclusion of the instant advisory fee agreement without the resolution of the board

B. The so-called self-transaction conducted by the representative director of one company without the approval of the board of directors.