Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent operating the D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant is a licensed real estate agent operating the F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office in Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E.

B. Around March 22, 2019, the Defendant confirmed the intention of purchase from G, etc., upon contact with G, etc., that the Plaintiff’s advertisement was appropriate for two parcels of land (hereinafter “instant real estate”), including Geumcheon-gu I, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant real estate”), where G, etc. found a new building to build a new office.

C. On March 26, 2019, G et al. concluded a sales contract for KRW 10,500,000 with respect to the real estate and a factory building of this case with the owner J, K, and the instant real estate and a factory building.

The real estate sales contract and the certificate of object of brokerage prepared at the time of the above sales contract were entered as L, M, and the buyer's real estate agent.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment thereon

A. The plaintiff asserted that the real estate of this case was introduced to the defendant on the premise of the co-mediation between the buyer and the buyer, and 1/2 of them were received brokerage fees from the buyer and divided by 1/2. Thus, 1/2 of the mediation fees is claimed to pay KRW 51,975,00.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 1 and 2 evidence, the plaintiff is recognized as having been stated in the real estate sales contract, the certificate of completion of real estate transaction contract, and the description of confirmation description of the object of brokerage, but further, as to whether the plaintiff and the defendant jointly act as a broker for the defendant and the purchaser, and whether the mediation remuneration is divided between the defendant and the defendant 1/2, the statement of evidence No. 5 or witness L's testimony is difficult to believe in light of the witness's testimony and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit without further review.

3. Conclusion.