1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. On January 15, 2016, the Plaintiff drafted a PM management service contract (hereinafter “instant service contract”) stating that “The representative F of the Committee for Promotion of the Housing Association (tentatively referred to as “the instant committee”) of the agency company C (hereinafter “C”) and the instant committee for Promotion of the instant committee for Promotion shall entrust the Plaintiff with the selection of a prospective contractor for construction and the conclusion of an understanding letter to carry out the business of constructing and selling apartment houses (hereinafter “instant project”) on the land of Ulsan-gu H-gu H (hereinafter “instant project”).

In order to establish the defendant, the members recruited by the committee of promotion of this case established a regional housing association under the Housing Act by enacting the rules of the defendant at the general meeting of the defendant on March 31, 2016, and by selecting representatives and officers.

On October 27, 2016, the head of Ulsan Southern District Office approved the establishment of the association to the defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] No dispute, entry in Gap evidence 3 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Right to claim a service price;

A. The gist of the party’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff was entrusted by the Promotion Committee of this case with the duties as specified in the instant service contract. The Defendant succeeded to the instant service contract by its inaugural general meeting by a resolution that the Promotion Committee of this case succeeds to all the services contracts, etc. entered into with the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the service fees stipulated in the instant service contract to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the service fees under the instant service contract to the Plaintiff. 2) While the Defendant’s general meeting did not explain the instant service contract at the time of the Defendant’s general meeting, the members were merely decided to the Defendant’s succession to the contract entered into by

Furthermore, the Plaintiff did not perform the duties specified in the instant service contract.

(b).