1. The Defendant’s KRW 33,500,000 as well as its annual 6% from July 11, 2018 to February 13, 2020 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company aimed at exercising events, etc., and the Defendant is a company operating B on December 2008 (hereinafter “instant hotel”).

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to provide services and some facilities necessary therefor for the purpose of holding various annual meetings, performances, weddings, and other events.

The plaintiff then renewed the contract, and installed lighting devices at the hotel conference of this case.

C. On June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, the contract period from July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2018, which is KRW 130,000,000 per annum (including value-added tax, KRW 2,7,8,000 per month on September, and KRW 9,000 per month on September, and KRW 12,125,00 per month during the remainder of the period (hereinafter “instant contract”).

While the Plaintiff provided services pursuant to the instant service contract, the Plaintiff was rendered a favorable judgment by filing a lawsuit against the Defendant demanding the service fee from June 2017 to February 2, 2018 out of the service fee under the instant service contract ( Daegu District Court Decision 2018Da104709, 2019Na304941).

(E) All defenses such as termination of contract, termination of agreement, and the Plaintiff’s failure of service, etc. alleged by the Defendant were rejected).

Under the instant service contract, the amount of service charges for four months from March 2018 to June 2018, which is the period during which the Defendant had not paid the service charges (the period during which the Defendant did not file a claim in the previous lawsuit) pursuant to the instant service contract is KRW 48,50,000, and the amount of wages for the Plaintiff’s employees retired in relation to the above service shall be deducted from the above amount.

F. Around August 2017, the Defendant purchased used equipment (mination, name dimer, power distribution equipment) from the Plaintiff in KRW 1 million, and did not pay the purchase price.

[Evidence] Facts without dispute, the purport of the whole argument

2. Determination

(a) above;