beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2015.04.08 2014나24152

양수금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. C around June 2004, around 14, the Defendant introduced F, G, H, I, J, and K with a total of 8,804 square meters (2,663 square meters) of 14 square meters (2,663 square meters), including the area of 595 square meters of land owned by D, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, D, with a view to introducing a person to purchase KRW 1.3 million per square year.

B. C and D concluded each real estate sales contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) between June 2004 and July 2004, where the seller was D and the seller sold 4 lots of Soyang-gu E, L, M, N forest land to the above F, etc. in Goyang-gu E, Young-gu.

C. C paid KRW 5 million each to the Defendant around June 29, 2004 and September 10, 2004 regarding the introduction of buyers of the instant contract. D.

C on February 6, 2014, upon entering into a contract to transfer the claim for return of unjust enrichment of KRW 10 million, which C paid to the Defendant by the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claim on February 10, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 2, Gap 2, 4-6, and 7-7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion constituted KRW 10 million, which the Defendant received in return for the introduction of the buyer from C from C, constitutes a brokerage commission received in the course of mediating the instant contract.

However, the defendant is not qualified as a real estate broker and has not registered the establishment of a brokerage office under the former Real Estate Brokerage Act. Since an agreement between a person who is not qualified as a broker under the former Real Estate Brokerage Act and a client is null and void, the defendant is obligated to return the amount equivalent to KRW 10 million paid by C as unjust enrichment.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant is not an introduction fee for the purchase introduction, but an amount that the Defendant agreed to settle the sales agency fee after carrying out the sales agency business of D-owned forest land with C and then received as the expenses necessary for the sales agency business first.

In addition, 10 million won is the introduction fee.