1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) during the period from February 11, 2018 to March 13, 2018, the Plaintiff arranged the sales contract for D Apartment E (hereinafter “instant apartment”) between the Defendant and C (hereinafter “instant apartment”) for D Apartment E (the purchase price of KRW 272 million, KRW 1.1 million, KRW 1.1 million, KRW 285 million, and KRW 2.1 million, KRW 2000,000,000, KRW 2000,000,000) between the Defendant and C; and (b) the Defendant paid to C the provisional contract amount of KRW 2 million, and thus the sales contract for the instant apartment was also concluded; (c) the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff a brokerage commission of KRW 959,50

2. In a comprehensive interpretation of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, real estate brokerage act acts mediating the transaction, exchange, lease, and other acquisition, loss, and modification of rights between the parties to the transaction regarding the object of brokerage, and in principle, the broker may claim a brokerage commission to the client only after the conclusion of the contract is completed, such as the preparation of the contract concerning the object of brokerage. However, in special circumstances where the broker has ceased to engage in the act of brokerage for the reason for which the broker was not responsible and the broker was finally unable to participate in the preparation of the contract, etc., even though the broker served as a important role in the formation of the contract, the broker has the authority to claim a brokerage commission corresponding to the degree of the brokerage act already performed by the client, in light of the purport of Article 686(3) of the Civil Act, Article

(1) The judgment of the court below (Supreme Court Decision 2005Na10743 Decided January 25, 2007) was affirmed by dismissal of the appeal to the court of final appeal (Supreme Court Decision 2007Da12432 Decided April 27, 2007). In this case, according to the plaintiff's assertion, the plaintiff's act of mediating the sales contract of the apartment of this case is a party in order to establish a contract under which only the provisional contract amount has been paid.