A. As a licensed real estate agent, the Plaintiff is running real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

B. On January 21, 2014, the Defendant, as a broker of the Plaintiff, leased F real estate located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the lease deposit of KRW 150 million and the lease deposit of KRW 150 million from March 1, 2014 to March 1, 2019 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On the other hand, Article 7 of the instant lease agreement states that "the brokerage commission shall be paid by both parties to this contract at the time of the conclusion of this contract, and even if this contract is invalidated, cancelled, or cancelled without the broker's intention or negligence, the brokerage commission shall be paid." Article 8 states that "licensed real estate agents shall prepare a description verifying the object of brokerage and deliver it to both parties to the transaction in the conclusion and public disclosure of the contract along with a copy of the business guarantee certificate (certificate, etc.). The plaintiff delivered a description verifying the object of brokerage to the defendant while mediating the instant lease contract. The brokerage commission column of the said confirmation statement states that "the brokerage commission shall be imposed separately by consultation with the client within the scope of 11,880,000 won (including additional tax 1,080,000 won)", calculation method [150,000 won (10,500,000 won x 100] x 9% of the transaction amount, and the brokerage commission may be imposed separately."

The defendant affixed a seal to the lessor column.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), witness E's witness E's testimony, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant, the client of the lease contract of this case, is obligated to pay the brokerage commission to the plaintiff, the broker.

Furthermore, the defendant must pay to the plaintiff.