(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.11.01 2016나64138

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2017.11.01 2016나64138

용역비

Text

1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. Costs arising from an appeal and an incidental appeal shall be respectively.

Reasons

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance and the plaintiff's grounds for incidental appeal are significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows: (a) the testimony of the witness C of this court, contrary to the facts recognized by the court of first instance, is excluded for the same reasons as the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the rejection of the witness C’s testimony in the following subparagraphs.

Witness

C The Court stated to the effect that “the Defendant requested to reduce the brokerage commission to KRW 7 million and delivered it, and that the Plaintiff agreed to reduce the brokerage commission to KRW 7 million by entering the account number on the witness. At the time, the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not have been able to attend a bank several times, and that they agreed to the reduction of the brokerage commission to reduce the brokerage commission to KRW 8 million.”

However, the following circumstances acknowledged in light of the statement Nos. 1, 2, and 6 of the evidence, the witness C’s testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings, namely, ① KRW 11,00,000,000 claimed by the Plaintiff is within the statutory brokerage commission, and the confirmation statement of the object of the instant real estate was written in the form of KRW 1,52,10,000,000,000,000,000,000 is the maximum statutory brokerage commission; ② D, the seller of the instant real estate, deposited all of the brokerage commission on September 15, 2015; ③ in this court, C stated that the Plaintiff carried out all the tasks of the instant real estate lending, etc. related to the instant real estate sales contract; ③ in view of the fact that it is difficult for the Plaintiff to deem that the commission was repeatedly reduced even if it was performed due to the circumstances of the parties to the sales contract.

any proposal that reduces more than seven million won.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2013.10.11 2013고정1321

-의정부지방법원 2019.05.16 2018나3503

-서울남부지방법원 2019.12.26 2019나52940

-인천지방법원 2017.07.20 2017나52330

-광주지방법원 2015.08.20 2015가단21917