2017 Mada89816 Service Costs

A

B

December 13, 2017

January 10, 2018

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 93,88,400 won with 15% interest per annum from September 26, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a service agreement (hereinafter referred to as “instant service agreement”) with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) and E, the Chairperson of the Promotion Committee of the D Regional Housing Association (hereinafter referred to as “C”), with the content that the Plaintiff, from June 2, 2017 to August 9, 2017, performed public relations activities for the recruitment of members of the D Regional Housing Association, and received KRW 103,84,400 as service fees, during the period from June 2, 2017 to August 2, 2017.

B. On August 22, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 22,572,00,000, out of the amount of unpaid services under the instant service contract, to the Plaintiff on August 22, 2017, and the Defendant paid KRW 28,396,80 on September 1, 201 of the same year to the Plaintiff in installments on September 1, 2010 of the same year, and the Defendant agreed to jointly and severally guaranteed the said association’s debt, and prepared a written confirmation of payment (hereinafter “written confirmation”) written by the Defendant from the said association and the Defendant on September 10 of the same year.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

According to the above facts, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 93,88,400 won for the service payment payable to the plaintiff according to the letter of payment in this case and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 26, 2017 to the day of full payment.

B. Judgment on the defendant's defense

On the other hand, the defendant has a defense to the effect that the defendant does not have an obligation to pay the above service costs to the plaintiff, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the defendant's defense is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Park Jong-chul