1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where the defendant added the following determination as to the argument raised in the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. At the time of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant asserts that B did not violate the duty of the broker to confirm and explain as the broker because B was present at the location and was aware of the fact that B requested the lessor F to provide the data on the lease of other tenants of the instant multi-family house, but the lessor F refused to provide the data.

According to the above, if the lessee does not comply with the request for data on the lease deposit of another tenant, the broker is obligated to enter the contents in the description of confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage. According to the evidence No. 3, the phrase "the rights of the object that is not actually related or publicly notified" of the description of confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage, which was delivered by B to the Plaintiff can be acknowledged that the contents of the lease contract of the lessee of the apartment house in this case or the contents that the lessee did not comply with the request for data on the contents of the lease contract of the tenant, and in light of such point, the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted within the scope of the above recognition and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is justified with this conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.