1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the claims expanded and reduced in this court, shall be modified as follows:

. On January 18, 2012, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the transfer of the foregoing claim on the transfer of all claims, including service payment claims under the service agreement.

By May 2012, the Plaintiff performed the affairs related to the purchase of State and public land under the instant service contract for state and public land.

G. On the other hand, on April 8, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with the Defendant (the president of the cooperative) to change the business of purchasing State and public land (hereinafter “instant contract to change State and public land”). The main contents of the contract are the same as the contents of the instant contract to change State and public land, but only the method of paying the contract price and the price are determined differently.

The total contract price shall be the number of days the purchase is completed.

(Total purchase contract number of 490 cases 】 150,000 won per case = 73,500,000 won (excluding value-added tax);

(b) Prepaid money: KRW 24,00,000 (payment at the time of a contract), intermediate payment: KRW 30,000,000 (at the time of construction management and the receipt of the Gu office for the remaining contract): any balance: KRW 19,50,000 (at the time of completion of receipt by each management office for the purchase of partnership contracts).

H. On September 4, 2014, the Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant pay the additional service cost under the instant moving service contract by September 20, 2014, and on the same day, the Plaintiff demanded that the service cost be paid by September 15, 2014 according to the instant government-owned or public land service contract and the instant modified service contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 4 and 6, witness L of the first instance trial, M's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Plaintiff is obligated to pay KRW 88,00,000 (including value-added tax) calculated as KRW 20,000 per month in accordance with Article 7 of the instant relocation service contract, as the Plaintiff’s four employees worked for four months from December 15, 201 to April 15, 2012 according to the service management additional contract under the instant relocation service contract. The Plaintiff is the State-owned and public-owned land of this case from K.