All appeals filed by the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff and the counterclaim claim filed by this court are dismissed.

2. Costs of appeal.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent operating real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “C real estate”, and the Defendant purchased real estate by means of the Plaintiff’s brokerage.

B. On November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff arranged a sales contract to purchase multi-family houses located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E from D for KRW 600 million for the purchase price.

Article 1(1) of the above sales contract provides that “The buyer is a party to a sales contract under the current status of a facility based on the ledger and registration certificate after the local response.”

At the time of a sales contract, the defendant confirmed that the state of internal and external facilities (building) and the wall and paper distribution status are normal, and affixed his/her seal on the confirmation manual of the object of brokerage.

C. At the time of the above sales contract, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to KRW 3 million calculated by 0.5% of the sales price as to the brokerage remuneration, and the Defendant paid a balance to D on November 30, 2017 and completed the registration of ownership transfer, thereby completing the said sales contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers for those with several numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of claim, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff a brokerage commission of KRW 3 million and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from March 10, 2018 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order, to the day of full payment.

B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant alleged that the plaintiff agreed to reduce the brokerage commission to 2.4 million won at the time of brokerage, but there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to reduce the brokerage commission. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3...