A. The Plaintiff, as the proposal of Defendant C, acquired 1/2 shares out of 250,810 square meters of land D in Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do, and 207,769 square meters of land E (hereinafter “instant land”).

The remainder of the land in this case was acquired by Defendant C’s wife F.

B. Defendant B received a request from Defendant C who represented the Plaintiff to sell the instant land on or around 2005. On June 25, 2010, the Plaintiff and F concluded a contract to sell the instant land at KRW 1.80,000,00 to the Foundation for the Maintenance of the Gu Tax Office of the Foundation on June 25, 2010.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). C.

At the request of the Defendants, the Plaintiff deposited KRW 70 million in the Defendant B’s account with the brokerage commission of the instant sales contract.

(Plaintiff deposited KRW 40,00,000 on June 28, 2010; KRW 15,000,000 on July 8, 2010; and KRW 15,000,00 on July 15, 2010; and KRW 00,000 on July 15, 200, respectively).

The Plaintiff received brokerage commission in excess of the upper limit of brokerage commission of licensed real estate agents under the former Licensed Real Estate Agents’ Business Affairs and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act. The Plaintiff did not delegate the sale of the instant land to Saturdays, but did not prepare a false real estate consulting contract with respect to the Plaintiff’s Saturdays, and filed a complaint with the Plaintiff due to the preparation of qualification-gymmetric documents and the crime of uttering.

E. However, in the course of criminal proceedings against the Defendants, only the violation of the former Licensed Real Estate Agent’s Business Affairs and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act was found guilty, and the Defendants’ qualification-based document preparation and event suspicion was pronounced innocent.

(The grounds for recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 12 through 15, and Eul’s evidence No. 12 through 15.