1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 18, 2017, the Defendant entered into a service contract with the purport of changing the use of Class II neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants) located on the third floor of buildings located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and 57 parcels into an entertainment drinking club, which is an amusement facility.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant calculated the service cost in KRW 11,00,000 under the above service contract.

Accordingly, the Defendant paid KRW 2,00,000 to the Plaintiff on July 18, 2017, and agreed to pay KRW 9,000,000 to the Plaintiff at the time of receipt of the application for permission for change.

C. Since then, the Plaintiff explained to the Defendant that the performance of the above service contract is impossible due to legal constraints.

Upon the plaintiff's explanation, the defendant renounced the existing plan that had changed the above Class II neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants) into entertainment taverns, and decided to change the Class II neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants) into the Class II neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants), and received the changed service from the plaintiff.

As the content of the service contract is modified, the original and the defendant subsequently re-determined the service cost.

On August 1, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an application for change of a building indication with the head of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on behalf of the Defendant, thereby performing the modified service as above, and the application was accepted on August 10, 2017.

E. On September 4, 2017, the Defendant additionally paid KRW 1,000,000 to the Plaintiff at the service cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 8, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserts that in accordance with the service agreement concluded on July 18, 2017 before the change of service work, the Defendant should pay the Plaintiff the service cost of KRW 7,00,000,000 and the delay damages therefor.

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged based on the above facts of recognition and the evidence revealed earlier, are ① Class II neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants).