1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 18,00,000 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto from April 26, 2014 to December 13, 2017 against the Defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 16, 2013, the Defendant entered into a real estate consulting service contract with F, the Plaintiff’s attached to purchase of Kimhae-si, Kimhae-si, E, 40,940 square meters of land (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as a land for a general industrial complex, and delegated F, on the same day, all rights to the instant real estate as the buyer under the sales contract.

B. On February 6, 2014, F and G, the owner of the instant real estate, representing the Defendant, concluded a sales contract with the Defendant to sell the instant real estate amounting to KRW 2 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On the date of the contract, the Defendant paid 200 million down payment to F.

C. The instant sales contract is accompanied by a confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage, and among which, the matters pertaining to the brokerage commission, etc. are indicated as the brokerage commission amounting to KRW 18 million.

In addition, the above sales contract and the confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage are signed and sealed by H as a seller broker and the buyer as a buyer broker.

On April 25, 2014, the Defendant paid the remainder 1.8 billion won under the above sales contract to G, and completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 8, Eul's 5, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. In addition to the above fact of determination as to the cause of claim, in light of the fact that the defendant did not raise any objection against the plaintiff or F's participation in the process of concluding the instant sales contract, it shall be deemed that an agreement was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant on the brokerage commission regarding the instant sales contract. Thus, the defendant has a substantial dispute over the existence and scope of the defendant's obligation to perform as to the plaintiff from April 26, 2014, which is the day following the date on which the mediation commission was completed and the transfer registration was completed, barring special circumstances.