Defendants are not guilty.

1. The Defendants are certified intermediaries.

From March 201, the Defendants: (a) around March 201, published the daily information paper that mainly deals with the advertisement of the certified brokerage company for the opening of the business in Jeju area; and (b) decided to form a “D association” under the initiative of the Defendants on October 25, 201, and (c) assumed office at the president of the association.

On April 4, 2013, the Defendants established a “E” legal entity with the intention to convert the foregoing organization into a legal entity and then, Defendant B was the chief director of the legal entity; Defendant A was the chief director; Defendant B was the chief director; Defendant B was the adviser from May 28, 2013; and Defendant B was the chief director.

No person, other than an authorized broker, shall use the name "authorized Broker Office", "Real Estate Brokerage", or any other similar name.

The Defendants established an Internet website (F) under the name of “D association” from April 2012, even though they are not the operators of D and E, the Defendants, as the operators of D and E, posted an advertisement of the goodwill premium in the name of “E” from October 2014 to December 28, 2015.

Accordingly, from April 2012 to January 21, 2016, the Defendants conspired to use the name “authorized Brokerage Office”, “real estate brokerage”, or “D association” and “E”, a similar name.

2. Determination

(a) Article 18(2) of the Authorized Brokerage Act provides that a person, other than an Authorized Brokerage Agent, shall not use the name “authorized Brokerage Agent Office”, “real estate brokerage”, or similar.

Whether it constitutes a similar name shall be determined by whether a person using the name is likely to mislead the person as an authorized broker or an authorized broker (Supreme Court).