2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff is a real estate broker operating the office of “D Licensed Real Estate Agent” in Busan Seo-gu, Busan.

B. On January 22, 2015, the Defendant concluded a contract for acquisition or transfer of rights (facilities) between E and the Plaintiff’s brokerage (hereinafter “instant contract for acquisition of rights”) as follows.

1. Indication of real estate in Busan Heung-gu F and H “H” equivalent to approximately 17 square meters (hereinafter “instant building”);

2. Total premium in the terms of contract: 35 million won (the balance of contract deposit of KRW 10 million and KRW 25 million): All the equipment.

3. The owner of the terms and conditions of the lease of the object to be transferred or taken over: deposit 19 million won/ monthly rent of 1.5 million won.

4. Transferor of parties to a contract: If the contract under a special agreement entered into by the defendant is not concluded with the owner of a building separate from the value added tax, this contract shall become void.

C. On January 2015, the Defendant reversed the instant contract for the acquisition of rights on the ground that the owner of the instant building demanded an increase of KRW 100,000 from the monthly rent of the existing lease, and subsequently returned the down payment KRW 10 million from E.

On the other hand, around February 2015, the Defendant entered into a new right (facilities) acquisition and transfer contract (hereinafter “instant secondary right acquisition contract”) with E with a total amount of KRW 30 million with respect to the instant building as direct trade. An agreement was concluded between the owner of the instant building and the owner of the instant building regarding KRW 19 million and KRW 1.6 million with a monthly rent.

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

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion has intentionally reversed the above contract in order to exempt the brokerage commission to be paid to the plaintiff according to the contract of acquisition of rights of this case and entered into the secondary acquisition contract of this case with E as direct trade. This is a tort in relation to the plaintiff.