1. The Defendant’s KRW 35,00,000 as well as 6% per annum from December 9, 2015 to July 13, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 23, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a design service contract by setting the price of KRW 80 million upon receiving a request for design services for construction of a housing complex B (area 7,320 square meters) from a new Gwangju Construction Co., Ltd.

B. After October 31, 2013, C succeeded to the rights and obligations of the new mining construction company, the owner of the building under the said design service contract.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and C concluded a design service contract (hereinafter “instant design service contract”) with the size of KRW 70,162 square meters and the price of KRW 80,000,000.

The Plaintiff completed the receipt of a report on the change of a design work and a construction participant in order to obtain a building permit in accordance with the instant design service contract, and fulfilled all the obligations under the said contract, such as making several contacts with the viewing and viewing in relation to the change of the construction design.

E. However, upon C’s failure to submit the written consent, etc. of the Kyoung Central Saemaul Depository, a person with superficies established on the land, to the public viewing, the Plaintiff requested the withdrawal of the application for permission to change the construction design, and the Plaintiff submitted the written withdrawal of the said application on May 9, 2014, as C’s request.

F. C paid the Plaintiff a total of KRW 10 million on November 6, 2013 as the design service cost, and thereafter, the Defendant, who was the party to the design service contract, promised to pay the Plaintiff KRW 30 million by October 13, 2015, which was the party to the said design service contract, to the Plaintiff on September 22, 2015, and agreed not to raise an objection to the first contract price if the promise is made.

G. After the filing of the instant lawsuit, C paid the Plaintiff KRW 35 million out of the design service cost.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, part of Gap 1-10 (including virtual number), and whether all pleadings are held

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant, as the actual party to the instant design service contract, is the Plaintiff according to the instant design service contract’s promise dated September 22, 2015.