beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 23,250,00 for the Plaintiff and 6% per annum from August 12, 2016 to March 10, 2017.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On March 23, 2012, the Dondi City Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “execution company”) entered into a trust agreement with an international trust company (hereinafter “trust company”) and a sales management trust agreement with the international trust company (hereinafter “trust company”) while carrying out the business of selling DNA officetels built on the land outside Gwangju-gu, Seo-gu and four parcels, which is owned by the execution company, and the Gaman Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Aman”).
(hereinafter referred to as “instant trust agreement”). The main content is that a trust company manages the ownership of an officetel’s business site, and if an officetel is newly constructed and registered for preservation in the future, an officetel’s ownership is also managed by the trust company. Only the trust company has the authority to sell an officetel and the sales price shall be deposited into the management account opened by the trust company, and no sales contract without the seal of the trust company shall take effect.
B. On March 23, 2012, the trust company completed the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the trust regarding the entire project site of officetels, and on November 27, 2015, the trust company completed registration for transfer of ownership with respect to Dtel 419 (hereinafter “instant officetels”), and on the same day, the registration procedure for transfer of ownership based on the trust in the name of the trust company was completed.
C. Around June 2014, the Defendant proposed that the Plaintiff may purchase the instant officetel at a lower price than the sales price. The Plaintiff concluded a sales contract for the instant officetel at the executory office on June 9, 2014 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and paid KRW 46.5 million on the same day when concluding the sales contract for the instant officetel (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The Defendant arbitrarily used KRW 6.5 million among them as a commission.
However, the seller of the above sales contract does not affix the seal of the trust company unlike the trust contract of this case.