상가건물매수 중개수수료
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.
1. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. 1) In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as indicated in the evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the Plaintiff is a person who runs real estate brokerage business under the trade name of “C,” and D is a building located in Nowon-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned on March 18, 2016.
(2) The sales contract to sell the purchase price to the Defendant for KRW 2.41 billion (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
(B) On June 20, 2016, the Defendant and its wife on June 20, 2016, and H, H, and I (the share ratio is 80/10, H 10/100, and 10/100, respectively).
(2) According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay a brokerage commission to the Plaintiff who arranged the instant sales contract, barring any special circumstance.
B. 1) The Plaintiff seeks payment of KRW 10,845,00 of the Plaintiff’s share of G, a joint broker, among KRW 21,690,00 based on the brokerage fee calculation statement attached to the instant sales contract, based on the brokerage fee calculation statement attached to the instant sales contract (i.e., the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 21,690,000) (i.e., KRW 21,690,000) and the Plaintiff’s share of KRW 1/2). According to the evidence No. 1, according to the statement of evidence No. 1, the Plaintiff’s statement of confirmation of the object of brokerage attached to the instant sales contract, “the amount of brokerage fee and actual cost, and the calculation statement” should be identified and sealed by the Defendant as “the details of calculation, 21,690,000,000 won, TRMS0.90,000, and the brokerage fee shall be imposed separately by the client and the real estate agent.”
However, unlike the above confirmation statement, the plaintiff is between D and D.