beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.01.22 2014나10226

중개수수료및시설권리금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff asserted that he was entrusted by Defendant B and C with the lease of the first floor of the building located in the Dongdong-gu, Busan (hereinafter “instant building”) owned by Defendant C, and introduced it to Defendant D through his birth and identification. However, the Defendants concluded a lease agreement on the instant building except for the Plaintiff, who is a real estate broker.

In addition, Defendant D, a new lessee of the instant building, is obligated to pay KRW 8,00,000 to F, the former lessee, according to a lease agreement.

Therefore, Defendant B and C are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the commission for brokerage fee of 585,00 won for the lease contract brokerage with Defendant D, Defendant D is obligated to pay the commission fee of 585,000 won for the establishment premium of 80,000 won for the establishment premium of 585,000 won for the lease contract brokerage, and delay damages for each of the above money.

2. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, there is no dispute between the parties to the judgment or according to the following facts: (1) the plaintiff runs the real estate brokerage business in the name of "H" in Busan Dong-gu, Busan; (2) on February 27, 2008, the defendant C entered into a contract with "F to lease the building of this case with the plaintiff's broker of the plaintiff to the amount of KRW 20,000,000, the rent of KRW 300,000; (3) on the special terms, "the part of the new repair facility of the lessee may be repaired by the lessee; and (4) on June 13, 2013, the lessee shall not claim the cost to the lessee; and (3) on June 13, 2013, the plaintiff entered into the contract with "H" in the name of "H"; and (4) on June 14, 2013, the plaintiff's phone number of the defendant C and the defendant C. 246.

The facts of the above recognition alone are that the Defendants sent to the Plaintiff around June 2013.