The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged C is the brokerage assistant of the "E-Certified Agent" in the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D 101, and the defendant is the representative of the above certified broker.

In 2015, the Defendant had C perform real estate rental brokerage business using the name and trade name of the Defendant in mediating the lease agreement for the "G" store located in the Nam-gu Seoul metropolitan area, Nam-gu.

2. Determination

A. According to Article 19(1) of the Authorized Brokerage Act, an authorized broker shall not allow another person to render brokerage services using his/her name or trade name, nor transfer or lend his/her brokerage office registration certificate to another person.

In light of the fact that the former and latter parts of the prohibition clause are provided concurrently, and that if they are violated, they shall be punished as the same statutory punishment (Article 49 (1) 7 of the Authorized Brokerage Act), the act of a certified brokerage broker allowing another person to render brokerage services using his/her name or trade name using his/her name or trade name shall be limited to the act of lending brokerage registration certificate, i.e., allowing another person to render brokerage services using his/her name as if he/she had another person use his/her name without actually participating in brokerage services.

On the other hand, whether to allow another person to render brokerage services using his/her name or trade name should be determined depending on whether an unqualified person actually performs his/her business by using the name of the certified broker, without going through the appearance of the certified broker (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do4542, Nov. 15, 2012). (b) Each police statement of H and I are admissible as evidence consistent with the facts charged.

However, examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the record in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, C alone is the defendant.