beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, in addition to the Plaintiff’s assertion added or emphasized by the court of first instance, the reasoning of the court’s explanation is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The plaintiff further determination is based on the plaintiff's market price of the apartment of this case was approximately KRW 425 million in mediating the lease contract of this case. The loan secured by the apartment of this case was KRW 360 million. If the plaintiff concludes the lease contract of this case with respect to the apartment of this case and pays KRW 150 million as the lease deposit, the plaintiff deceivings the plaintiff to use the entire deposit amount paid to the repayment of bank loans, and thereby caused the plaintiff to enter into the lease contract of this case. Thus, the defendant claims that the plaintiff is liable to pay damages for delay amounting to KRW 150 million in compensation for damages caused by tort, but the above assertion is without merit.
In addition, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the above KRW 150 million as compensation for damages caused by the broker negligence, because the plaintiff did not deliver the confirmation and explanatory note to the plaintiff at the time of mediating the lease contract of this case, and then delivered the confirmation and explanatory note of the above object to the plaintiff during which the auction procedure concerning the apartment of this case is in progress.
According to Gap evidence No. 5, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff stated "the maximum debt amount of 40,2480,000 won" as matters of rights other than ownership in the explanatory note, which the plaintiff received from the defendant. Since the matters stated in the confirmation and explanatory note of the above brokerage object are stated in the whole lease contract of this case, the defendant, as alleged by the plaintiff, at the time of concluding the whole lease contract of this case.