1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating the C Professional Engineer Office (hereinafter “C”).

On March 29, 2012, the Plaintiff agreed to employ the Defendant as one-year contract worker, monthly salary of KRW 3,050,000. At the time, the Defendant had a first-class certificate of construction equipment engineer at the time and worked in the field of construction equipment design for at least 15 years.

The plaintiff had the defendant take charge of preparing shop drawings using the computer program.

B. In early 2012, the Plaintiff (C) entered into a design service contract with E architect office (representative F) that is a business entity that is planned to design and supervise the extension project of Doll Doll Doll Doll D (hereinafter “Doll Doll Doll”) and entered into a design service contract with KRW 35,000,000 (excluding value-added tax) in relation to the design business of the construction project of Doll Doll Doll Doll Do

(hereinafter referred to as “instant design service contract”). E architect paid the Plaintiff KRW 7,00,000 (excluding value-added tax) out of the amount of the service payment in accordance with the said design service contract.

C. C, while carrying out design service work, supplied E architect office design drawings completed, and design drawings in the field of fire-fighting equipment (including combustion equipment) among the design drawings, the design drawings of the above design drawings were requested to be prepared by SC Co., Ltd., a company specializing in fire-fighting design (hereinafter “SC”).

Three persons received the architectural drawings through the Defendant, prepared the design drawings of fire-fighting facilities, and completed the procedure of drawing certification and registration in the name of the UN CC Technician. D.

Since then, after deliberation by the competent authority on July 2012, the construction permission was granted on or around August 2012. However, E architect notified the Plaintiff that “A design service contract was revoked on the side of the Plullet on the ground of design errors and excessive design in the field of machinery,” and that “A design service contract was revoked on or around October 2012.”