1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 2,156,00 and KRW 1,509,200 among them.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 29, 2018, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with C on January 9, 2019, setting the purchase price of KRW 593,00,000 and the payment date of the remainder (300,000,000) owned by the Defendant in Daegu-gun as a broker of the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, to sell the apartment to C. In consideration of the circumstances where the occupancy date of the location where a new director should be located after selling his apartment at the time, the Defendant determined that “the remaining date may be advanced by mutual agreement” as stipulated in paragraph (4) of the sales contract between the buyer and the buyer, taking into account that “the remaining date may be used as funds at the place of a new occupancy by mutual agreement,” and that the brokerage commission pursuant to the sales contract under the above sales contract may be used as funds at the place of a new occupancy by receiving in advance any balance pursuant to the sales contract.

(hereinafter referred to as “trade brokerage commission”). (b)

On December 10, 2018, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with D on January 4, 2019, with the payment date of KRW 205,00,000, and the remainder (185,000,000) of the lease deposit for the apartment located in Daegu-gun as the Plaintiff’s brokerage, and entered into a lease agreement that is leased from D. (2) the brokerage commission under the above lease agreement is KRW 615,00 (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter referred to as "lease Brokerage Fee"). (c)

Plaintiff

(1) On December 10, 2018, the Plaintiff’s employee, including the number of actual employees and the dispute with the Defendant, (1) the broker assistant, who is the Plaintiff’s employee, responded to the purport that the sale of real estate for the remaining payment from the buyer as described in the above paragraph (a) does not make a net demand, and that the remainder should be paid on January 9, 2019, which is the remainder of the sales contract, under the sales contract. (2) The Defendant was expected to receive the remainder of the sales contract on January 4, 2019, which is the remainder of the lease contract, without the Defendant’s consent. However, the Defendant did not receive the remainder from the buyer, and the Plaintiff did not receive the remainder from the buyer, as described in the above paragraph (1) without the Defendant’s consent.