logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2018.08.16 2017나209328
부동산중개 수수료
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that runs real estate brokerage business, Defendant A is the owner of 601 and 602 of the Ildong-gu Seoul Metropolitan City D building (hereinafter “instant building”), and Defendant C is the company established with Defendant B’s partner.

B. On September 1, 2016, Defendant B and C concluded a lease agreement to lease the instant building from Defendant A (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff, which is the primary claim, was acting as a broker for the conclusion of the instant lease agreement. As such, the Defendants are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 6,831,00 as brokerage commission, and the Defendants are liable to pay damages for delay from September 20, 2016, after receiving the object and receiving the object.

B. The Defendants, who are the conjunctive claim, requested the Plaintiff to act as a broker of the lease contract of the instant building, and the delegation contract was concluded between the Defendants and the Plaintiff.

Nevertheless, the Defendants unilaterally withdrawn the intention of delegation and failed to receive reasonable remuneration even though the Plaintiff acted as a broker.

Therefore, the Defendants are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages arising from joint tort, and in the case of Defendant A, they are obligated to pay the Plaintiff remuneration as the mandatory, and in the case of Defendant B and C, the amount equivalent to the brokerage commission is unjust. Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to return it to

3. Determination

A. According to Articles 22, 25, 26, and 32 of the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act regarding the determination of the primary cause of action, a broker is lawful, such as entering into a brokerage contract with the client and providing brokerage services, delivering to the broker a document stating the content of confirmation and explanation of the object of brokerage, and preparing a contract document stating the details of transaction, such as transaction amount, etc.

arrow