1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s primary fact is a company that mainly carries out sales agency and advertising agency, and the Defendant is a person who newly built an officetel and neighborhood living facilities building on the land of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).

On March 21, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a "D Advertising Agency Contract" (hereinafter referred to as the "D Advertising Agency Contract") under which the Defendant will act as an agent for the purpose of selling the instant building, and prepared a "D Advertising Agency Contract" (Evidence A5; hereinafter referred to as the "instant Advertising Agency Contract").

Then, on May 9, 2016, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a “sale agency service contract” (hereinafter “instant sales agency contract”) with the content that the Defendant vicariously performs the sales business of the instant building, and drafted a “sale agency service contract” (Evidence A7; hereinafter “instant sales agency contract”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 5 and 7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claim for the sales agency fee

A. According to the instant sales agency contract which causes the claim, in the case of sales in a commercial building, the Defendant pays 7.5% of the sales price per store to the Plaintiff as sales agency, and even if the Defendant concludes a sales contract directly, it shall be included in the Plaintiff’s sales agency performance, but the fees shall be subject to the separate consultation.

In addition, there was an implied separate agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant that the plaintiff should return the amount calculated by deducting from 3,500,000 won to 4.4% of the commission when the defendant entered into a direct sales contract.

Although the Plaintiff secured the buyer of the commercial building E among the instant buildings, at the Defendant’s request, the Defendant directly concluded a sales contract for the commercial building E in KRW 851,201,725.

Therefore, the defendant is a fee for the sale of commercial buildings E in accordance with the sales agency contract of this case, and KRW 63,840,129, the sales price of which is equivalent to 7.5% =851.