업무정지처분취소
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for revocation of the disposition rendered on August 16, 2019 shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
Details of the disposition
The Plaintiff is a person who operates a real estate brokerage office under the trade name of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Licensed Real Estate Agent B.
On November 15, 2017, the Plaintiff was entrusted by D with the sales brokerage of Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan E-building F (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
D On April 5, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with G and H to sell the instant real estate at KRW 220 million as the Plaintiff’s intermediary.
D paid KRW 2 million to the Plaintiff on April 6, 2018 as a brokerage commission.
On March 19, 2019, the Defendant issued a disposition of suspension of business from April 1, 2019 to September 30, 2019 on the ground that the Plaintiff received KRW 2 million as a brokerage commission in excess of the upper limit under the statutes.
The plaintiff appealed against this and filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the business suspension disposition with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission.
On March 28, 2019, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission rendered ex officio a decision to suspend the validity of the above business suspension disposition until the ruling on the administrative appeal claim.
On June 24, 2019, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission received brokerage fees in excess of the upper limit under statutes. However, when a seller requests brokerage of the real estate of this case, a seller agrees to pay three million won along with brokerage fees when the Plaintiff requests brokerage of the real estate of this case, the Plaintiff actually paid the advertising fees in accordance with the agreement, and the prosecutor of the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office issued a disposition that there was no suspicion against the violation of the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act by the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s disposition of suspension of business should be mitigated, and the disposition of suspension of business of one month was mitigated.
(hereinafter the Defendant’s disposition that was mitigated for one month during which business was suspended is “instant first disposition”, and the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Administrative Appeals Commission’s ruling on mitigation (hereinafter “instant ruling”). The Plaintiff became aware of the said ruling on August 15, 2019.