1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around 2013, the board of directors of Defendant Nonghyup decided to purchase gas stations for business purposes, and the Plaintiff became aware of the purchase plan for gas stations through Defendant Nonghyup, a non-standing director of the said board of directors, at the time of physical color of gas stations to be purchased by Defendant Nonghyup following the above resolution.

B. On the other hand, the owner F of the e-owned gas station on the ground of Gyeonggi D requested G to intermediate the sale of the e-owned gas station, and Defendant Nonghyup purchased the e-owned gas station from F as the broker of G around May 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including branch numbers for those with a satisfy number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff entered into a mediation contract with the non-standing director C of the Defendant Nonghyup who represented the Defendant Nonghyup, and the Plaintiff, as a broker of the Defendant Nonghyup, arranged a trade list and an appraisal report of the instant gas station and provided it to the Defendant Nonghyup, and jointly acted as a broker between F and the Defendant Nonghyup, and as a broker between F and the Defendant Nonghyup.

However, Defendant No. 3 did not pay the Plaintiff the commission for the sales brokerage of the above gas station, and Defendant No. 3 is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the commission for the sales brokerage of the gas station and the damages for delay.

3. The assertion and judgment

A. If Gap's evidence Nos. 3 and 4 regarding whether a mediation contract for the purchase of gas stations was concluded between the plaintiff and defendant No. 3 and the defendant No. 4 added the purport of the whole pleadings, it is not sufficient to acknowledge that Eul, a non-standing director of defendant No. NA, was aware that the board of directors of defendant No. NA decided to purchase the gas station for business purposes and notified the plaintiff of the purchase plan for the gas station by defendant No. C, but it is not sufficient to acknowledge that Eul concluded a mediation contract for the purchase of gas stations on behalf of the defendant, and there is

Even if C is acting on behalf of Defendant Agricultural Cooperative, it is a brokerage contract with the Plaintiff for purchase of gas stations.