공인중개사법위반
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. No certified brokerage broker, etc. for the outline of the facts charged shall receive money or goods in excess of the remuneration or actual expenses under Article 32 of the Certified Judicial Brokerage Act under any pretext, such as case, donation, etc.;
The Defendant is a certified broker who operates a certified brokerage office under the name of “D Authorized Brokerage Office” in Chungcheongnam-Nam budget-gun, and around September 24, 2015, in the said D Authorized Brokerage Office, the Defendant arranged a contract for trading the volume of 9,917 square meters for KRW 625,60,000 for 625,60,000, for 20,000,000 for the above F and received money from the said F, in excess of the maximum amount of KRW 5,630,40,00 for legal fees.
2. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, it is insufficient to recognize that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone by the Defendant was entirely paid KRW 20 million from F is the brokerage commission for G, H, I, and J land 9,917 square meters (hereinafter “land in this case”), and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
① In this Court, F, a seller of the instant land, could sell the instant land only after seven to eight years after setting the time to sell the instant land in one time.
Defendant
Other than that, it appears that there was no transaction demand for the land itself.
② On September 24, 2015, F entered into a sales contract with K and L for the sale of the instant land owned by the clan to K and L for 625,60,000 won (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). Article 8 of the said sales contract states, “The seller or buyer’s remuneration for consulting related to the development of the instant land other than this contract is separate from brokerage remuneration.”
(3) Article 2 (1) of the Official Brokerage Act shall apply.