The appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall bear the costs of appeal.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveal the following facts.

A. On February 18, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the consignment operation of the Museum Center (hereinafter referred to as “entrusted contract”) with a private person C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) entrusted with the management of B apartment housing located in the Gu of Michuhol-gu Incheon, Incheon, on a five-year period from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2019, with respect to the emblem center, which is a common area.

Section 1 of Article 9 of the Entrustment Contract may be terminated if "A (management entity) violates any of the important matters prescribed in this Agreement."

Provided, That this shall not apply to violations due to force majeure, such as natural disasters.

“......”

Article 9 (2) "A does not violate the terms and conditions of the contract of B, but if the contract of B is terminated, A shall compensate for the investment and damages invested in the Center within one month from the termination date of the contract of B.

(2) Around July 2016, the head of the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City requested C to present his/her opinion and present evidence on whether a resident sports facility is used for profit (lease and business). Around September 2016, the head of the Gu of Michuhol-gu issued a corrective order on the ground that C violated the foregoing even though the operator, other than the management entity, could not use the resident sports facility for profit.

On March 10, 2017, C did not report the result of the correction and notified C in advance to the effect that C will impose an administrative fine of KRW 5 million on March 10, 2017.

(c)

On April 12, 2017, the Defendant issued a corrective order to the Plaintiff as above, and notified the Plaintiff that the contract was terminated on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s registration was closed on November 21, 2016, and demanded the Plaintiff to answer in writing whether the contract was terminated at any time.

On April 17, 2017, the plaintiff sent the following official questions to the defendant:

An entrustment contract;