Text
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The judgment of the court below that found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged in this case on a different premise that Defendant B did not use a name similar to that of a licensed real estate agent and did not work at the licensed real estate agent office at the time of the occurrence of this case because Defendant A was not healthy and that Defendant B did not lend a certificate of qualification to Defendant B, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Although Defendant B did not use a name similar to that of a licensed real estate agent, the judgment of the court below convicting Defendant B of the facts charged in this case on a different premise
B. Each sentence (Defendant A: a fine of KRW 1 million, Defendant B: a fine of KRW 1.5 million) sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants is excessively unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts
A. A summary of the facts charged in the instant case: (a) A person, other than Defendant B, was prohibited from using the name “licensed Real Estate Agent Office”, “Real Estate Brokerage”, or “Real Estate Brokerage” or any other similar name; (b) the Defendant, around January 13, 2014, issued to F, who was seeking to purchase a commercial building at the E-real estate office located in Yongsan-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, Dongdong-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, B, 218, an order stating “E real estate, business start-up consulting/M B, specialized commercial lease, and sale” while mediating the sales of the said D-dong building B (B). Accordingly, even if the Defendant is not a broker, the Defendant used the name “licensed Real Estate Agent Office”, “Real Estate Brokerage”, “Real Estate Brokerage”, or similar name. (c) The Defendant A broker shall not allow another person to engage in brokerage business using his name or trade name.
Nevertheless, on November 21, 2013, the Defendant re-registered the “E Licensed Real Estate Agent Office” that was closed by taking the Defendant as the representative of the Dong-dong building D, U.S., Dong-gu, U.S., Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do, and the Defendant.