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. Basic facts

A. 1) The Defendant, as a technical administrative agent, is engaged in the business of licensed technical administrative agent in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (Evidence 5). (2) On September 9, 2015, the Plaintiff delegated the Defendant with “the affairs necessary for the Plaintiff to obtain permission to occupy and use public waters with respect to Youngnam-gun E2,244 square meters (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) on the land.”

(hereinafter “instant contract” (hereinafter “instant contract”). The main contents relating to the rescission of the instant contract are as follows: (a) evidence No. 1; (b) evidence No. 14; and (c) No. 14).

Article 2 (Advance Payment and Successful Remuneration) The Plaintiff shall pay the Defendant the amount of KRW 3,000,000 as down payment and the intermediate payment of KRW 3,00,000 as down payment, and the contingent remuneration shall be unpaid.

Article 4 (Cancellation of Contracts) The plaintiff and the defendant may terminate the contract at any time.

Provided, That if the defendant starts the management of delegated affairs, he/she shall not demand the return of the retainer, and shall be paid remuneration according to the progress rate of delegated affairs.

Article 6 (Matters to be Permitted) The permission to occupy and use the public waters of this case shall be fully responsible and obtained by the defendant, and if the permission is not obtained, the full amount of the permission shall be refunded excluding the actual expenses (explosion equipment, survey expenses, design expenses, etc.) already paid

B. On September 16, 2015, the Plaintiff paid the Defendant the down payment of KRW 3,000,000 on September 16, 2015 under the instant contract.

(A) Evidence No. 2) (c)

After entering into the instant contract that is impossible to occupy and use public waters, the Defendant investigated the current state of the instant land, etc., and confirmed the details of the permission by visiting wooden Regional Maritime Affairs and Fisheries Office

As a result, since the land in this case is part of port facilities, and the (oil) Tho Lake has used the land in this case as a aggregate storage yard, it was rare that the plaintiff cannot obtain permission to occupy and use the land in this case from the time of the contract in this case, and there was evidence No. 4.