logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.18 2017나81885
손해배상(기)
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

Basic Facts

On May 1, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with C, stating that “the Plaintiff shall lease the instant officetel No. 807 on May 4, 2017, 201 for two years from May 4, 2017, the term of the contract for the instant officetel No. 807 (hereinafter “the instant officetel”) from Seongbuk-si, Sungnam-si, the Plaintiff paid a down payment of KRW 35 million (Evidence 1), and the same day to C (hereinafter “the instant down payment”).

(Evidence A 6) At the time, the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent of the Plaintiff (Lessee) and E, a licensed real estate agent of the Plaintiff (Lessee), jointly arranged the conclusion of the instant lease agreement.

On May 3, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with C to cancel the instant lease agreement, and C to refund the down payment of KRW 3.5 million to the Plaintiff by May 3, 2017 (hereinafter “instant rescission agreement”). Around July 11, 2017, “E between E and E” entered into an agreement to return one half of the down payment (hereinafter “the instant return agreement”) to the Plaintiff. Around that time, the Plaintiff received two million won out of the down payment from E.

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, the Defendant’s judgment as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7, and the purport of the entire pleadings, as to the Defendant’s defense of principal safety, arguing that since the Plaintiff and C have agreed to bring an action against the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent who arranged the above contract at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, he/she shall not be held liable for civil or criminal liability, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

On the other hand, the litigant agreement is valid because it generates the effect of the important litigation law such as the waiver of the right to trial guaranteed by the Constitution to the parties to the lawsuit, which can be anticipated at the time of the agreement.

arrow