1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The defendant's assertion that the plaintiff was above 2. A.

Since the assignment of claims asserted in a claim is not a substantial transfer, but a claim is transferred in a trust to have the plaintiff file a lawsuit for the transfer of claims in court convenience, the assignment of claims is null and void as it violates Article 7 of the Trust Act. Accordingly, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful.

B. Determination 1) In a case where the assignment of a claim, etc. primarily takes place with the aim of having the said assignment of claim, Article 7 of the Trust Act shall be applied mutatis mutandis even if the said assignment of claim does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act. Whether it is the primary purpose of having the said assignment of claim is to be determined in light of various circumstances, including the process and method of concluding the assignment of claim contract, interval between the transfer contract and the filing of the lawsuit, and the personal relationship between the transferor and the transferee, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da8628, Sept. 12, 2013).

It is not sufficient to recognize that the claims alleged in this paragraph have been transferred, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

2. Judgment on the merits

A. On November 5, 2013, C, a licensed real estate agent, is obligated to pay C the legal brokerage commission (i.e., transaction amount of KRW 52,683,750,750 (= transaction amount of KRW 5,853,750,000 x legal brokerage commission rate of KRW 0.09), which is stipulated in the former Licensed Real Estate Agents’ Business Affairs and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act.

B. C transfers to the Plaintiff the right to claim the payment of the above brokerage commission against the Defendant at the beginning of December 2013.