logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원포항지원 2015.06.23 2015가단2414
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s spouse, the Plaintiff’s spouse, title trusted Nonparty E with the size of 2,571.5 square meters in the area of 6,754 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On August 31, 2012, E sold all of the instant land and its ground objects to Nonparty F in KRW 2,290,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). At the time, the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent, arranged the instant sales contract, and E paid KRW 100,000 to the Defendant.

C. Although the upper limit of brokerage commission under the former Licensed Real Estate Agents’ Business Affairs and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act is 20,610,000 won, which is 0.09% of the sales price, the Defendant was paid KRW 100,000 as brokerage commission in excess of this limit.

Since the Plaintiff succeeded to the deceased C, a title truster of the instant land, the Defendant is obligated to refund KRW 30,226,737, which is equivalent to 2,571.5 square meters of the title trust area out of KRW 79,390,00,00 paid by E, the title trustee, to the Defendant, in excess of the statutory rate.

2. Determination

A. According to the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, a title trust agreement is null and void, but it cannot be asserted against a third party.

B. The fact that the Defendant mediated the sales contract for the instant land with delegation from E is without dispute between the parties, and the fact that the title trust agreement existed as alleged by the Plaintiff was established between the deceased C and E in full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4. However, even if the above title trust agreement exists, there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant, who arranged the instant sales contract, was aware of the existence of the said title trust agreement since the owner of the instant land was E at the time of the instant sales contract, and the Defendant, the title trustee, was the real estate sales contract from E.

arrow