logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1991. 6. 25. 선고 91도485 판결
[부동산중개업법위반][공1991.8.15.(902),2071]
Main Issues

Whether security rights, such as mortgage, are included in "other rights" as referred to in Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Real Estate Brokerage Act (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

In full view of the provisions of Article 2 subparagraph 1 and Article 3 of the Real Estate Brokerage Act and Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, among "other rights" under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the same Act, security rights such as mortgage shall be included.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 3 of the Real Estate Brokerage Act; Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Real Estate Brokerage Act

Escopics

Defendant 1 and one other

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendants

Defense Counsel

Attorney Yoon Yoon-chul

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 90No6964 delivered on January 22, 1991

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

Reasons

We examine the Defendants’ grounds of appeal.

Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Real Estate Brokerage Act provides that the term "trust business" means the business of buying and selling, exchanging, leasing, or arranging other acts relating to the acquisition, loss, and transfer of rights between parties to a transaction regarding the object of brokerage under Article 3 at a certain fee, and Article 3 of the same Act provides that the object of brokerage under Article 3 of the same Act is one of the objects of brokerage under the same Act; 3. Other property rights and articles prescribed by the Presidential Decree; and Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act lists the object of brokerage under Article 3 subparagraph 3 of the same Act; 3. A factory foundation under the Factory Mortgage Act is listed under the Standing Timber Act; 3. In full view of the above provisions, among other rights as referred to in subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the same Act, since the above other rights should be included in the real rights such as mortgage, etc., it is nothing more than an independent opinion that the above other rights should be limited to the ownership and other profit-making rights.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Yong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow