2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

Purport of claim and appeal

(b).

A. The Defendant is a housing association promotion committee (which did not obtain authorization from the competent authority to establish a housing association) composed for the purpose of implementing a housing construction project in the Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan area D (hereinafter “instant project”) by establishing a housing association pursuant to the Housing Act, and the committee for promotion (which did not obtain authorization from the competent authority to establish a housing association) and B (mutual stock company E prior to

B. On May 13, 2016, between B and the Defendant, the Plaintiff: (a) performed services on behalf of the members of the association that planned to implement the instant project on behalf of the Plaintiff for the conclusion of the sales contract (referring to the joining of the association members); (b) the Plaintiff and B and the Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 6,600,000 per household (including value-added tax) with the sales commission; and (c) concluded a contract with the Plaintiff to pay the sales commission (hereinafter “instant sales agency contract”) after the conclusion of the sales contract on the number of households corresponding to at least 20% of the scheduled members (excluding the branch owners)

C. On May 13, 2016, the Plaintiff lent KRW 200,000,000 to B (hereinafter “instant loan”) and determined the period of repayment as “after the rate of sale (excluding the rate of sale of the branch share) under the instant sales agency contract reaches 30%.”

B On November 10, 2016, a written undertaking was prepared and issued to the Plaintiff to the effect that “in relation to the instant sales agency contract, the Plaintiff shall undertake to pay the Plaintiff KRW 869,60,000,000, totaling the unpaid sales commission of KRW 669,600,000 and the instant loan of KRW 200,000,00.”

E. On July 26, 2016, the Plaintiff received 440,000,000 won in total as sales commission under the instant sales agency contract, including KRW 140,000,000 on August 12, 2016, and KRW 20,000 on September 13, 2016, and KRW 80,000 on December 14, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2-1, 2-2, and 3-2 of the evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff alleged the first claim related to the sale commission is the sales agency contract of this case.