beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.06.15 2015나2036592

분양대행금 지급청구의 소

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that is engaged in real estate sales agency business, and the Defendant is a local public corporation established under the Local Public Enterprises Act to engage in the acquisition, reserve, development and supply of land, lease management business, etc.

B. The Defendant was running the business of building and selling the AB industrial complex in Kim Jong-si (hereinafter “instant industrial complex”).

Around June 2012, the Defendant entered into an oral agreement with the Plaintiff to sell the industrial complex of this case, and if the Plaintiff arranges sales of the industrial complex of this case, the Defendant would pay 3% of the sales price as a commission (Provided, That the Defendant would pay 70% of the sales price in full when the buyer pays the purchase price, and 30% of the sales fee when the first intermediate payment is paid in full) (hereinafter “instant sales agency contract”).

C. The Plaintiff started the sales agency business by setting up a sales office on the street entering the instant business complex at around that time pursuant to the sales agency contract of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1 and 2, testimony of witness C of the first instance trial, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claim for fees related to the sales contract with D Co., Ltd.

A. The party's assertion 1) The defendant is a D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D") by means of the plaintiff's offering of sale to the plaintiff.

(B) Since the Defendant concluded a contract with D to sell the land within the industrial complex of this case in KRW 63,246,768,00,00, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 1,897,40,040, which is 3% of the sales price, as sales brokerage commission pursuant to the sales agency contract of this case. Defendant A does not have any mediation until the sales contract between the Defendant and D is concluded, and the Plaintiff did not submit a written confirmation of sales brokerage from D. (B) even if the sales contract with D was concluded by the Plaintiff’s sales brokerage, the sales brokerage commission agreement later is applied, or the Civil Act is applicable.