1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be acknowledged, either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with the purport of the entire pleadings, each entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2.

The Plaintiff is a company operating security business, and the Defendant is a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project partnership that implements a housing redevelopment and rearrangement project as a business area A, and around March 201, the Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into a service contract with the Defendant, setting the service period from March 10, 201 to the period of service for the facility security services (hereinafter “facility security services in this case”) within the A Housing Redevelopment and Rearrangement Project Zone Zone A (hereinafter “instant facility security services”). The service contract was entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, setting the service period from March 10, 201 to 10,000 won per person per day for the guard as of 8 hours per day (hereinafter “instant service contract”).

B. The Plaintiff from March 8, 2011 to the same year

6. Until December 25, 200, the instant facility security service was rendered by inserting the security personnel.

2. Determination:

A. If there is a contract, which is a disposition document regarding the cause of the claim, the existence and content of the declaration of intent as stated in the contract shall be recognized unless there are special circumstances. Thus, the facts that the contract of this case was made between the plaintiff and the defendant are as recognized earlier, barring special circumstances, the plaintiff and the defendant entered into a service contract based on the contract of this case. Accordingly, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff the service fees in proportion to the number of expenses invested by the plaintiff in accordance with the contract of this case.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion is a “B” corporation (hereinafter “B”) around March 7, 201.

In this case, the plaintiff entered into a service contract with the chief of the police station who was awarded the contract for the facility security service of this case, and the chief of the police station, who was awarded the contract for the facility security service of this case, shall report the assignment of security guards.