logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2016.12.15 2016가단219559
중개수수료 반환 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 108,50,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 19, 2016 to the day of full payment.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 2, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant’s brokerage to exchange parcel and its ground (hereinafter “instant Hongcheon Real Estate”) other than D, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun and its ground buildings (hereinafter “instant Hongcheon Real Estate”) and the F building in a considerable area of Cheongju-si owned by E (hereinafter “instant building”). On the same day, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer of 1/2 equity ownership along with C in relation to the instant building.

B. On July 2, 2012, the Plaintiff and C issued a promissory note amounting to KRW 110 million at face value to the Defendant, and the said promissory note was prepared by a notary public with respect to G Joint Law Office No. 171, 2012, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Defendant each on July 25, 2012, and KRW 85 million on July 27, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2 through 4 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion that the plaintiff, without qualification as a licensed real estate agent, received KRW 18.5 million from the plaintiff the brokerage commission for the brokerage of the exchange contract of the instant red real estate and the instant building. Since the agreement between the broker and the unqualified real estate agent is null and void, the defendant asserts that the above brokerage commission received from the plaintiff is obligated to return it as unjust enrichment.

In regard to this, the defendant requested the plaintiff to provide consultation on whether to sell gas stations in operation in the Hongcheon Real Estate of this case, and provided consultation on the suitability of sale and purchase or exchange, items of business, location of real estate to be acquired, purpose of use, and feasibility of business, etc., and received labor costs and expenses from the plaintiff, not receiving brokerage fees.

3. Prior to the amendment by Act No. 11690 on March 23, 2013, of the former Licensed Real Estate Agent’s Business Affairs and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act pertaining to the registration of establishment of a brokerage office;

(a) The same shall apply;

The relevant provisions shall be a brokerage office by an unqualified licensed real estate agent.

arrow