1. All claims filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the counterclaim claims by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 19, 2010, the Plaintiff leased D Apartment 103 Dong 801 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from Nonparty C with the lease deposit amount of KRW 70,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 70,000, and the contractual lease term of KRW 20,000, from March 20 to March 20, 2012 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”), and the Defendant mediated the instant lease agreement.

B. The instant lease agreement contains a special clause stating that “The preferential right to collateral security (E: 168,00,000 won with the maximum debt amount of 166,50,000 won with the maximum debt amount of 168,000 won with the maximum debt amount of 168,00,000 won with respect to the leased object as of the date of the contract. At the same time, the lessor shall register a reduction of the maximum debt amount of the senior collateral to KRW 150,000 with the maximum debt amount of 1,50,000,000 with respect to the remainder payment, and shall register a cancellation of the subordinated collateral (as of March 31, 200). If the lessor fails to perform the special agreement under this lease agreement, the effect of the contract shall be retroactively cancelled, and it shall not be exempt from any liability for all expenses and procedures arising from the contract (including the debt amount) including

C. C received all the deposit from the Plaintiff, but failed to implement the instant special agreement. At the request of the bank of us Co., Ltd., the Suwon District Court F, with respect to the instant apartment, the procedure for the auction of real estate rent (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was conducted, and on July 27, 2011, the instant apartment was sold to Nonparty G. The Plaintiff received only KRW 28,477,374 from the instant auction procedure.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant lease agreement is in fact concluded by Nonparty H, a party to the instant contract, who is the Plaintiff’s intermediary.