1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid next shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) in the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff’s cause of claim is added to Chapter 8, Chapter 17, and the Defendant added “2. Additional Judgment” with respect to the assertion that the Defendant emphasizes or adds to this court; and (b) in the judgment of the court of first instance, Chapter 2,

In addition to the deletion of the theory of lawsuit, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Even if the contract of this case was terminated by the Defendant’s notice of termination on July 7, 2015 due to the Plaintiff’s cause attributable to the additional claim, the said contract is more than the contract for the fixed period of remuneration, and the contract is more than 30% of the down payment, which is the service cost due to which the due date has already arrived, regardless of whose cause attributable, shall be paid to the Defendant.”

2. Additional determination

A. As to the assertion that the obligation to pay service costs was not satisfied and that the period during which the obligation was not met, the defendant may claim remuneration in proportion to the affairs already managed by the mandatary in the event that the mandate is terminated due to reasons not attributable to the mandatary in the course of performing the delegated affairs by Article 686(3) of the Civil Act

If the mandate terminates in the middle of the mandate due to the reasons attributable to the mandatary, the mandatary cannot claim all remuneration. Thus, the defendant asserts that he does not have any obligation to pay the service cost of this case to the plaintiff.

The latter part of Article 686(2) of the Civil Act, as seen earlier, stipulates that a delegating person may claim remuneration after the expiration of the delegation period in the case of a delegation contract whose remuneration is fixed for the period, which is irrelevant to who is the cause attributable to the delegating party. In order to interpret the above provision and Article 686(3) of the Civil Act harmoniously, Article 686(3) of the Civil Act provides that where remuneration is a regular division, the delegation shall be made in the middle of a certain period.