1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to pay below shall be revoked.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. C is a licensed real estate agent operating the E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, and the plaintiff is his brokerage assistant.

B. On September 6, 2013, the Korea Land and Housing Corporation issued an occasional purchase announcement to the effect that 850 units, such as multi-family houses, located in Daejeon Metropolitan City, etc., will be purchased on a first-come-come-served basis (hereinafter “instant announcement”). The instant announcement included the fact that the Korea Land and Housing Corporation would pay statutory brokerage fees (0.4% of the purchase amount) when purchasing through the real estate brokerage office.

C. Around the time of the instant announcement, the Defendant owned seven G apartment units (Nos. 206, 210, 401, 601, 601, 705, 901, and 1401) located in Seo-gu, Daejeon. On October 2, 2013, the Defendant visited the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, along with C, submitted a document for filing an application for purchase of the said seven G apartment units, and on November 5, 2013, entered into a sales contract with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation for selling the said seven G apartment units at KRW 1,173,950,00 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and C signed and sealed the broker’s column in the instant sales contract as a broker.

C was paid 4,695,800 won (=1,173,950,000 x 0.4%) under the pretext of brokerage commission for the instant sales contract by the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, but the Defendant did not receive brokerage commission from the Defendant.

E. On December 5, 2013, C transferred to the Plaintiff the right to claim a brokerage commission of the instant sales contract against his/her Defendant, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on December 10, 2013.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-5, Gap evidence 6-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 12-19, Eul evidence 2 and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The defendant's assertion C transferred the right to claim the brokerage commission of the sales contract of this case to the plaintiff.