[수표금][집24(3)민,339;공1977.1.1.(551),9627]
The effects of the contract of remuneration in excess of the standard and limit prescribed by the Ordinance of Seoul Special Metropolitan City or Do which determines the fee for the introduction business;
Article 4(2) and (1) and Article 5 subparag. 3 of the Introduction Business Act, which prohibits the designation of the commission for the business in excess of the standard and limit under the ordinances of Seoul Special Metropolitan City or Do (Do) and prohibits the act of demanding or receiving money or goods other than the prescribed fee regardless of the pretext, is aimed at promoting the convenience of people's lives by denying the judicial effect of the commission agreement for the part exceeding the maximum limit under the law, and limiting the effects of the commission agreement to the maximum limit under the law of the law, so the above provisions of the law shall be deemed null and void.
Plaintiff (Attorney Lee Jae-woo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant (Attorney Kang In-bok, Counsel for defendant-appellant)
Daegu District Court Decision 75Na311 delivered on February 4, 1976
The appeal shall be dismissed. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, Article 4 of the Introduction Business Act provides that the criteria and limits of the fee for the introduction business shall not be set in excess of the above criteria and limits, and Article 5 of the same Act prohibits the introduction business operator from demanding or receiving any money or goods other than the prescribed fee, regardless of the name, regardless of the above limits. The above relevant provisions should be interpreted as a so-called mandatory law that denies the judicial effect of the introduction fee agreement in excess of the above limits as well as the number of the introduction fee (free of the name), and it shall be interpreted as a so-called mandatory law that denies the legal effect of the introduction fee agreement in excess of the above limits. Thus, Article 4 of the Introduction Business Act provides that the criteria and limits of the fee for the introduction business shall not be set in excess of the above limits, and Article 192,000 won (No. 4) which is the maximum limit of the introduction fee for the introduction business, and Article 5 of the same Act provides that the amount of the fee for the introduction business shall be 1,000,0,000 won,00 won,00 won of the real property already issued by the plaintiff.
The purpose of this article is to deny the judicial effect of the fee agreement on the part exceeding the prescribed limit of the law, and limit the judicial effect of the fee agreement to the maximum limit of the law, and thereby to promote the convenience of the people's lives by limiting the legal effect of the fee agreement to the legal effect of the fee agreement on the part exceeding the prescribed limit of the law among the fee agreement for the introduction business under Article 4 (2) of this article, which is enacted by the Seoul Special Metropolitan City or Do (Do). The fee for the introduction business was not determined in excess of the standard and limit of the ordinance of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City or Do(Do). Accordingly, the above provision of the law is part of the so-called mandatory law and the agreement exceeding the prescribed maximum amount shall be deemed null and void. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles on the fulfillment of the conditions under the Civil Act or the legal principles of the Check Act or the Act on the Introduction Business.
The appeal is groundless.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Young-chul (Presiding Justice)