1. The Defendant’s decision on performance recommendation against the Plaintiff on October 19, 2017, Jinju District Court, Jincheon-gun Court, Jincheon-gun, 2017.

1. The facts below the final decision of performance recommendation can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statements Nos. 1 and 2 above.

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff on November 25, 2015, stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the sum of brokerage commission and value-added tax, KRW 11,836,00,00 for each of the instant brokerage contracts (hereinafter “each of the instant brokerage contracts”) with respect to the D land outside Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, Jincheon-gun, and KRW 9,720,00, and ② on March 16, 2016, the Defendant entered into a real estate brokerage contract with each of the instant brokerage contracts (hereinafter “instant brokerage contract”). As such, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant a total of KRW 11,836,00,00 for brokerage commission and value-added tax and delay damages.”

B. Accordingly, on October 19, 2017, the instant court issued a decision of performance recommendation with the same content, and on October 26, 2017, the said decision was served on the Plaintiff on October 26, 2017, and confirmed on November 10, 2017.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the mediation contract of this case was concluded between the non-party E and the defendant, and that it was not concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant, and that the mediation contract of this case was concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant.

B. In light of the following circumstances, the evidence presented by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the instant brokerage contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

The defendant's argument is without merit.

① In fact, in light of the fact that each of the instant brokerage practices is E, that the Defendant agreed on the settlement with E in connection with each of the instant brokerage, and the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is difficult to deem that each of the instant brokerage contracts was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

② Furthermore, the commission for brokerage is completed immediately after the transaction is completed, and the above lawsuit is filed after the lapse of one year from the date of the completion of the transaction in this case.