logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2018.08.22 2017나4616
중개수수료
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. On November 11, 2016, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, to lease the instant apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) by setting the deposit amount of KRW 760,00,000, and the period from December 17, 2016 to December 16, 2018, through the joint brokerage of the Plaintiff, a licensed real estate agent, and D (Lessee).

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant agreed to pay 6,080,000 won at the time of the above brokerage request, the defendant asserts that the defendant agreed to receive a brokerage commission from the existing lessee of the apartment of this case and not to receive a brokerage commission from the defendant.

B. The following facts and circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence Nos. 1 through 4, namely, ① the fact that a tenant living in the apartment of this case was entrusted with the brokerage of the lease agreement of this case as the existing tenant who had been living in the apartment of this case terminated the lease agreement before the expiration of the lease agreement period, ② the Plaintiff appears to have received brokerage commission from the existing tenant for the lease agreement of the apartment of this case, ③ the Plaintiff itself is also going through brokerage of the apartment of this case without commission, and ③ the Defendant stated that “the commission was entrusted to the Plaintiff for brokerage of the rental agreement of the FF apartment owned by the Defendant’s father,” and the Defendant did not receive brokerage commission for the apartment of this case. ④ The Plaintiff did not explicitly inform the Plaintiff that it was entrusted with brokerage of the above F apartment lease agreement.

arrow