1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

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

1. Presumed facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in Pakistan, and around August 2010, the Plaintiff was requested by the husband of Defendant B to mediate the sale of each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by Defendant B (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

B. H was scheduled at the time to marry with Defendant C and D’s daughters at the time, and at the present time, H is the said Defendants’ act.

On November 5, 2013, in order to move the lease term expires, the Plaintiff was recommended to purchase the instant commercial building, but it was rejected due to the lack of the terms and conditions of transaction, such as the purchase price.

C. On February 6, 2014, Defendant B sold the instant commercial building to Defendant C and D for KRW 360,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and the same year.

3. 21. The registration of ownership transfer of the above commercial building was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 9 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although Defendant B, a seller of the Plaintiff, and Defendant C and D, a buyer, become aware of each other through the Plaintiff, a real estate broker, sold the instant commercial building, Defendant C and D directly concluded the instant sales contract without excluding the Plaintiff at the time of the preparation of the sales contract.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay brokerage fees to the Plaintiff.

3. Determination as follows: The right to claim the brokerage commission related to the sale and purchase takes place on the condition that the sale and purchase is constituted through the hands of the broker; therefore, insofar as the broker does not lead to the sale and purchase by the broker, even if the broker does not make any effort to do so, it cannot claim remuneration equivalent to the ratio

(See Supreme Court Decision 4289Da18968 delivered on April 12, 1956, and Supreme Court Decision 90Da18968 delivered on April 9, 1991). However, even though a contract has been entered into almost a certain stage of sexual history due to the act of brokerage of a real estate broker, the client is the client.