1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) paid KRW 4,675,00 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) for KRW 4,675,00 and its related amount from June 26, 2018 to November 21, 2019.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent who operates the “E-real estate brokerage office” in subparagraph D of the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C apartment shopping mall.

B. In order to conduct reading room business, the Defendant requested the Plaintiff to mediate the lease agreement between the Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Da apartment shopping mall F and G (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

C. On November 28, 2015, the Defendant concluded, as the Plaintiff’s broker, a lease agreement with H on the above-mentioned F.

(Special Agreement) From February 15, 2016 to February 15, 2019, the deposit amount of KRW 50,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 3,400,000 (pre-payment on February 15, 201) shall be settled under this Agreement after the remainder of the deposit amounts (special agreement).

This Agreement shall not be deemed to have existed at the date of compromise.

(The costs of reconciliation before the settlement shall be borne by the lessor and the lessee respectively. At the time of conclusion of the above lease agreement, the Plaintiff prepared a description verifying the object of brokerage and received the signature and seal of the Defendant. In the “matters concerning brokerage fees, etc.” of the said description, the amount of KRW 3,510,000, calculated as follows, is indicated as brokerage fees.

Details of calculation shall be 50,00,000 won (3,400,000 won x 100) x 0.9% (value added tax may be imposed separately).

D. On December 9, 2015, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with I as follows with regard to the foregoing G subparagraph owned by the Plaintiff’s broker.

(Special Agreement) From February 15, 2016 to February 15, 2019, the deposit amount of KRW 60,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 4,000 (reconciliation after February 15, 201) shall be settled after the remainder date of the lawsuit.

If it is impracticable to make a settlement decision due to a failure on the date of settlement, this contract shall not be deemed to have been

(Expenses are to be borne by both the lessor and the lessee, respectively. The Plaintiff prepared a description verifying the object of brokerage at the time of the conclusion of the said lease agreement and received the signature and seal of the Defendant. In the “matters concerning brokerage remuneration, etc.” of the said description, KRW 4,140,000, calculated as follows, is stated as brokerage remuneration.