The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim added in this court are all dismissed.

after the filing of an appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for further determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim added by this court under Section 2 below. As such, the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited or added as follows, is included in the summary of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The margin between the purport of the claim and the reason for the calculation of the number of parallel No. 7-8 on the side 2 is not considered one.

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

the following shall apply:

B. On November 1, 2017, the Plaintiff: (a) as the Defendant’s broker, sold the buildings listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant apartment”) to E in the purchase price of KRW 765 million; and (b) as follows: (b) No. 2) No. 11 of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the following is added.

"......"

E, based on the instant sales contract, filed a claim against the Plaintiff for the implementation of the procedure for the registration of the transfer of ownership of the instant apartment and for the transfer of the said apartment (Article 516898 of the Seoul Central District Court 2018), and filed a claim for damages arising from the Plaintiff’s failure to perform the duty of the registration of the transfer of ownership of the instant apartment, but the content of the claim is omitted.

On January 24, 2019, the above court issued a judgment ordering E to implement the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership of the above apartment and transfer of the above apartment.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the above judgment (Seoul High Court Decision 2019Na201212). However, on June 20, 2019, the above appellate court also rendered a judgment to the same effect, and the above appellate court's judgment became final and conclusive as it was (hereinafter the above case's first and second trials were referred to as "related civil cases"). D.

On the other hand, the plaintiff would sell the above apartment in KRW 770 million even though the apartment price in this case was 1.4 billion.

A false statement.