The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed in entirety.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent who runs the real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.” Defendant B is a person who was seeking to sell the said commercial building as the owner of H shares on the ground of 1 parcel outside Songpa-gu Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant commercial building”). Defendant C and Defendant D intended to purchase the said commercial building as the husband’s company.

On March 16, 2018, Defendant B entered into a sales contract with Defendant C to sell the instant commercial building for KRW 900 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) as a broker of the I Licensed Real Estate Agent Office and J Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.

[Ground for Recognition: The facts without dispute, Eul's statement in Eul evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings] The plaintiff's assertion was practically concluded as the plaintiff's intermediary, but the defendants concluded the contract of this case with the exclusion of the plaintiff for the purpose of not paying brokerage fees to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendants are obligated to pay brokerage fees to the plaintiff as originally paid to the plaintiff.

Judgment

A broker of relevant legal principles may claim a payment of brokerage commission only when a contract has been concluded between the client and the other party by his/her own act of brokerage, and even if the broker has made an endeavor as a broker, he/she shall not claim a brokerage commission equivalent to the ratio of his/her endeavor unless the contract has been concluded by such act

However, even though the contract has been almost at the same stage due to the act of brokerage of the broker, the client and the other party conspired with each other to avoid the brokerage commission and concluded a direct contract without excluding the broker.

In spite of the fact that the broker has been unable to participate in the preparation of the final contract because the act of brokerage has been interrupted due to the reasons not attributable to the broker, although the broker has served as a important factor in the formation of the contract.