1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant (appointed party) and the appointed party C in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 12, 2017, the Defendant and the Appointor concluded a sales contract with respect to the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, with respect to the size of 504 square meters and 454 square meters in total (hereinafter “instant real estate”) prior to Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si, respectively, as follows:

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant sales contract.” - The first sales contract - The subject matter of sale: F, G, H, and buyer: The seller: F, G, H, and buyer: the Defendant; the buyer: the seller; the seller: the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the seller; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer: the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer; the buyer

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff agreed to set the brokerage commission for the first sales contract between the Defendant and the Appointor as 0.9% of the sales price, and the brokerage commission for the second sales contract as 0.8% of the sales price. At the same time, the Plaintiff concluded the instant sales contract and agreed to pay each

(hereinafter referred to as “instant brokerage commission agreement”). (c)

The Defendant and the Appointor did not pay a brokerage commission for the instant sales contract to the Plaintiff.

【Facts without dispute over the ground for recognition, entries in Gap's evidence 1 through 4 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts of recognition of the above obligation to pay the brokerage commission, the defendant and the selector shall pay to the plaintiff the brokerage commission for the sales contract of this case and the damages for its delay in accordance with the agreement of the commission.

In addition, in cases where multiple parties concurrently become the debtor, in principle, the multiple debtors bear the installment obligations (Article 408 of the Civil Act). Therefore, it is reasonable to view that the obligation to pay the intermediary fees to the plaintiff, the defendant against the plaintiff, and the Claimant is the installment obligation

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant and the Appointor shall each charge the Plaintiff KRW 4,270,00 [=1/2 x 8,540,00 [=1 sales contract].