1. The defendant shall pay 3,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from June 10, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings by either the plaintiff and the defendant, or by taking account of the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 8.

1) The Plaintiff is a juristic person established for the purpose of the development, sale (a wholesale and retail business), and lease business. The Defendant is a juristic person established for the purpose of software development, supply, consultation, and sales business. 2) The Plaintiff and the Defendant drafted a document (Evidence A 3) stating “a service contract” on August 22, 2013, and the Plaintiff accepted all services related to “the development of the integrated store management system” required by the Defendant from the Defendant, and the Defendant shall perform the duties, and the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the value-added tax rate of KRW 100 million for the service cost and the amount equivalent to the said value-added tax rate, within seven days after the conclusion of the contract, and the intermediate payment of KRW 40 million for the intermediate payment, KRW 30 million for the remainder and KRW 30 million for the remaining seven days after the lapse of two months after the completion of the examination.

(B) On August 2, 2013, the Plaintiff invested human resources for development from August 22, 2013 according to the instant contract.

B. According to the above findings of determination, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 30 million won (a total of the intermediate payment of KRW 30 million and the value-added tax rate of KRW 3 million) under the instant contract, as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from June 10, 2014 to the date of full payment following the delivery of the written complaint.

2. As to the Defendant’s application for resumption of pleading, the Defendant filed an application for resumption of pleading on the ground that the argument was concluded without disputing the Plaintiff’s claim by failing to receive a written answer after the submission of the written answer.

The parties shall apply for resumption of pleadings in order to submit evidence of assertion after the closing of pleadings.