1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent who runs real estate brokerage business under the trade name of "D real estate brokerage office" in Busan-gun, and Eul, the husband of the plaintiff, is a brokerage assistant for the plaintiff.

B. On July 27, 2017, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with F Co., Ltd. and Busan-gun G factory site of 2455.6 square meters and above-ground buildings (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on September 27, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap 2, 3, and 6 (including each number) without dispute

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff mediated the instant sales contract.

The defendant agreed to pay to the plaintiff 15 million won of brokerage commission.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the brokerage commission of KRW 15 million and delay damages.

B. The Plaintiff did not act as an intermediary for the instant sales contract.

Non-licensed real estate agents and lending E in the name of the plaintiff to substantially engage in brokerage business, thereby mediating the sales contract of this case, which is null and void in violation of the Licensed Real Estate Agent Act, which is a mandatory law.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. According to the evidence mentioned above (1) as to whether the obligation to pay the brokerage commission arises or not, as well as evidence Nos. 1 and 8 as well as evidence Nos. 1 and 1, video of the first instance court’s appraisal commission as to appraiser H, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to the brokerage commission as at the time of the instant sales contract, and the fact that the instant sales contract was concluded at the real estate agent office operated by the Plaintiff, as a licensed real estate agent at the time of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff signed and sealed the sales contract, the confirmation of the object of brokerage, and the explanatory note respectively, and thus, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff

(2) Whether the instant brokerage contract is null and void in violation of the mandatory provisions