1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who runs gold-type design business with the trade name called C.

B. Around January 2017, the Defendant: (a) requested that D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) make an estimate of the gold production of the sprink 100m square meters for plastic houses (hereinafter “instant parts”) for the purpose of manufacturing electronic parts and motor vehicle parts; and (b) around January 2017, the Defendant requested D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”).

【Fact-finding without dispute, testimony of witness E of the party concerned, purport of whole pleadings】

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) around January 10, 2017, the Defendant filed an oral request with the Plaintiff for design for the production of gold papers of the instant parts at KRW 20 million. The Plaintiff completed the gold design drawings around February 20, 2017, and delivered them to the Nonparty Company designated by the Defendant.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the design service cost of KRW 20 million.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion did not have concluded a service contract for the gold-type design of the instant parts directly with the Plaintiff.

In addition, the defendant requested the non-party company to make an estimate of the gold production of the instant parts, but failed to obtain a written estimate, and did not conclude the gold production contract.

B. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff entered into a service contract for the gold-type design of the instant parts with the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. Rather, in full view of the entries of No. 1, witness E in the trial, witness E’s testimony and pleading, the Defendant entered into a gold-type production contract with the Nonparty Company around April 2016, with a 40m of each pipe dedicated to plastic houses, and the Plaintiff designed a gold-type design for the plastic pipe 40m of each pipe dedicated to plastic houses from the Nonparty Company. The Plaintiff, around February 20, 2017, was requested from the Nonparty Company to design the gold-type design for the plastic pipe dedicated to the gold-type design of the instant parts.