1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Presumed factual basis

A. On August 17, 2012, the Plaintiff, as a broker of Defendant B and C, entered into a contract to transfer the right to lease and the right to operate a 190 million won in total (50 million won for lease deposit and KRW 140 million for rental deposit) of the right to lease and the right to operate a Gac shop of 143.12 square meters of the 1st floor among the four-story neighborhood living facilities of the 4th apartment roof in Gwangju North-gu, Gwangju (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

B. On August 22, 2012, the Plaintiff, as a broker of Defendant B and C, drafted a lease agreement with the owner of the instant commercial building, from September 1, 2012 to August 31, 2014, to lease the instant commercial building in KRW 50 million, monthly rent of KRW 3 million.

C. Of the matters to be confirmed by the broker's basic confirmation of "the product subject to brokerage" prepared by Defendant B and C at the time of the preparation of the above lease agreement, the "whether or not the product is in violation of the building ledger" is indicated in the "law" portion. Of the detailed confirmation of the broker's broker, "the actual relation of the product or the rights of the product that is not publicly notified" refers to the blank.

Since before 2009, there were approximately 55 square meters of the prefabricated Building Building (hereinafter “instant violating building”) in violation of the Building Act on the parking lot attached to the instant commercial building. The lessees of the instant commercial building used the instant violating building for business, and the Plaintiff used the instant violating building for smoking, etc.

E. From September 2009, the owner H removed the instant violating building around July 2014, among those imposed corrective orders and non-performance penalty several times from the North-gu Seoul Metropolitan City office on the instant violating building.

F. On August 26, 2014, the Plaintiff notified H of the termination of the instant commercial building’s lease agreement, and the lease agreement was terminated due to the expiration of the period of validity.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, and .