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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “C Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” and is requested by D who is a party to a sales contract, and B is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” and the Defendant is a corporation that purchased the real estate by requesting B to conduct the brokerage as follows:

B. B introduced “F” and “3,596 square meters on the part of the Defendant at the port of port” and conducted an appraisal on May 2, 2017 for calculating the purchase price of the said land, but no land was sold.

The two above persons are to equally divide 50% of the total real estate fees for buyers and buyers, respectively, arising from the sale and purchase of the Nam-gu G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M land and buildings at port as those engaged in the licensed real estate agent business, and the expenses incurred therefrom shall be paid equally.

In addition, even if a land seller purchases N/O land at port at port, it will be jointly arranged and divided equally by 50%.

C. After that, B introduced to the Defendant the Nam-gu G, H, I, J, K, K, L, M land and its ground buildings at the port of port owned D. On May 29, 2017, the Plaintiff and B, an individual among the sellers, drafted a contract on the distribution of fees and the distribution of fees.

(hereinafter “instant allocation agreement”). The said written contract contains the following descriptions:

On November 23, 2017, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with D to purchase the remaining-gu G land and I, and L-ground buildings in KRW 5.2 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged by the parties concerned concluded the instant distribution agreement with B and jointly arranged the instant sales contract with B, thereby receiving KRW 46,800,000 from the defendant as a brokerage commission. However, the defendant is KRW 13,00,000.