1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 23, 2014, the Plaintiff, a real estate broker qualified as a licensed real estate agent, registered and operated a brokerage office under the name of “C Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City (the actual title appears to have been referred to as “Creal estate”), and D was a person whose employment was reported as the above brokerage assistant from the time of the registration of the above office, and died on January 5, 2016.

B. On September 24, 2015, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the YMA Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) and with respect to the entire first floor of the instant officetel building (hereinafter “instant real estate”), around KRW 500 million, monthly rent, and KRW 25 million.5 million.

C. The first Defendant offered terms and conditions of the instant real estate deposit of KRW 50 million and KRW 27 million per month when requesting brokerage to D with regard to the instant real estate. On July 11, 2015, the first Defendant examined the instant real estate, such as directly leaving the instant real estate, and compared the said real estate with the condition of KRW 500 million per month of rent and KRW 25 million per month, while making a mutual compromise between the parties to the instant real estate, by presenting the conditions of KRW 50 million per month of rent and KRW 25 million.

8. On 29. 29. The non-party company renounced the conclusion of the contract, and thereafter, the contract was concluded as above on the condition that the non-party company bears the expenses for removal and alteration of use of the existing business facilities of the real estate of this case.

[Recognition] Facts without dispute; Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, 7, 8, 10; Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 5 (including paper numbers); witness F's testimony; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On July 3, 2015, the plaintiff 1, who received a request from the defendant for the brokerage of the lease of the real estate of this case on July 3, 2015, at the request of the non-party company, and the same year.

7. 11. The defendant introduced the non-party company's side to the personnel in charge of the defendant, and then both sides consider the above real estate at the same time, and the lease deposit and the rent are the same.