1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 16, 2014, Defendant B entered into a lease agreement with D on a deposit of KRW 75,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 7,500,000, and the period from October 7, 2014 to October 7, 2015 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

B. On December 29, 2014, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement with F on a deposit of KRW 100,000,000 per annum, monthly rent of KRW 12,650,000, and the period from March 15, 2015 to March 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

C. On February 16, 2015, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement with H and I on the instant building’s underground floor deposit of KRW 150,00,000, rent of KRW 20,000, and the period from March 15, 2015 to March 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant third lease agreement”).

On March 21, 2015, the Defendants entered into a lease agreement with the J as to the first floor of the instant building with a deposit of KRW 100,00,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 12,60,000, and the period from April 20, 2015 to April 20, 2017 (hereinafter “instant fourth lease agreement,” and each of the said lease agreements collectively referred to as “each of the instant lease agreements”).

E. Article 8 of each of the instant lease agreements provides that “A brokerage commission shall be paid even if this contract is null and void, cancelled, or cancelled without a broker’s intention or negligence.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to whether a broker is obligated to pay brokerage commission

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, each of the instant lease agreements was concluded by the Plaintiff’s brokerage, and the Defendants shall pay the commission of agreement and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.