摘要： “指导案例1号”从“跳单”这一焦点问题切入居间实务，对于推动民法学研究面向生活，直面薄弱环节，具有典型意义。或因学说准备不足，本案处理结果仍停留于直观的价值判断，混淆了主题，回避了严密的论证，个案处理说服力不足，指导性价值也难以发挥。应探询“跳单”现象的深层法理，藉此检验直观层面衡量结果的正误，并在每一个论证环节，赋予伸缩弹性，测度本案的“指导性”作用。本文还在居间独家委托和多人居间报酬请求权方面，为居间法体系建构做好铺垫。

关键词: 指导案例1号, 居间合同, 跳单, 报酬请求权

Abstract: Through the hot topic of jump-treaty, guiding case No. 1 touches the brokerage practice and therefore is endowed with typical significance of driving civil law to face the real life and the actual weakness. But unfortunately, as a result of the shortage of enough theory preparation, the result of this case stays on the superficial value judgment, which confused the focus, evaded the rigorous reasoning, weakened the persuasion of the individual case judgment, and hindered its guiding value. At this time, we must get deep into the legal theory through the phenomenon of jump-treaty and build an intact reasoning mode of it, from which we can check the result of the direct measurement, put the elasticity into every reasoning link, and measure the real extent of the case’s guiding effect. At the same time, guiding case No.1 can also make its contribution to preparing for the brokerage legal system construction from the perspective of the exclusive brokerage and brokerage reward．

Key words: Guiding Case One, Brokerage Contract, Jump-treaty, Claim for Reward