분양대행 수수료
1. Defendants are jointly and severally 34,777,440 won and Defendant C Co., Ltd. with respect thereto from July 18, 2015 and Defendant B.
1. Basic facts
A. On May 15, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales agency service contract (hereinafter “the first service contract”) with Defendant C with respect to 15 commercial buildings among the “E” located in D in the e (hereinafter “instant building”) that the said Defendant entrusted, constructed, and sold in trust with Defendant B, and the Defendant B entered into a sales agency service contract with the content similar to the said service contract for the purpose of guaranteeing the payment of the sales agency fee under the said service contract with the Plaintiff on the 19th of the same month.
B. According to the above service contract, the sales agency fee is “8% of the sales price (excluding value-added tax)” and the period of business performance is “from the date of conclusion of the contract for sales agency to the date of occupancy (date of September 30, 2014).”
During the above period, the plaintiff completed the sales agency for the six commercial buildings, and the sales agency fee was KRW 338,105,680.
C. On September 30, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales agency service contract (hereinafter “second service contract”) with Defendant C, setting the sales agency fee as “15% of the sales price (excluding value-added tax)” with respect to the unsold nine rooms in the said 15 units, and setting the period of service as “within the fixed price (excluding value-added tax)” (hereinafter “second service contract”).
As a sales agency fee, the Plaintiff received KRW 283,328,240 in total from Defendant B, and KRW 203,328,240 in total, the sum of KRW 10,000 in total from Defendant C, and KRW 17,000 in total from February 10, 2015.
【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 2 through 4, and 7, the purport of the whole pleading
2. As to the Defendants’ claim for fee payment
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff sold each commercial building Nos. 101 and 102 during the period of the second service contract. After the termination of the second service contract, the Plaintiff continued to sell the sales agency services in addition to the commercial buildings Nos. 106, 107, and 115, and the sales agency fees for the said five commercial buildings are KRW 367,40,000.
Therefore, the Defendants are therefore.