1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C, Defendant C, as to KRW 5,602,50, and each of the said money, from September 3, 2019 to July 202.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a licensed real estate agent who runs real estate brokerage business under the trade name of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D.

B. On May 22, 2019, the Defendants concluded a real estate sales contract (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts”) with the Plaintiff’s broker, whereby the Plaintiff sold KRW 14,39,000 square meters of G field 680 square meters in Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Seoul, and KRW 106 square meters of land (I) and its ground buildings outside Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, and KRW 2,241,000,000, respectively, owned by the Defendant C, for each of the real estate sales contracts (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts”).

C. At the time of each of the instant sales contracts, ① a description verifying the object of brokerage signed and sealed by Defendant B indicated as follows: (i) “trade remuneration of KRW 71,95,00,000; (ii) 14,39,000,000 x 0.5%”; and (iii) a description verifying the object of brokerage, signed and sealed by Defendant C, respectively, as follows: “11,205,000,000, 0.00 x 0.5%.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) is an agreement commission for the brokerage of each of the instant sales contracts. Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, Defendant C is obligated to pay the amount of KRW 71,95,000 and delay damages, and Defendant C is obligated to pay KRW 11,205,00 and delay damages. 2) The Defendants: (a) each of the instant sales contracts decided the direct purchase price between the Defendants and the seller and decided on May 22, 2019, only the preparation of the sales contract was made at the Plaintiff’s licensed real estate agent’s office; (b) the Defendants did not request the Plaintiff to mediate the sales contract; and (c) the Plaintiff did not broker each of the instant sales contracts.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment Nos. 1, 1, 2, 5, and 6, each of the instant sales contracts stated as follows: “The brokerage remuneration shall be paid by both parties to the instant contract at the same time as this contract is concluded,” and at the time, the Plaintiff and the Defendants are acting as a broker for each of the instant sales contracts.