logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.01.19 2014가단46422
손해배상청구
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The parties' assertion

A. On September 19, 201, the Plaintiff introduced the right to move into a rental apartment for a new mixed father in D’s E zone from C, and paid KRW 25,000,000 to C as premium on September 19, 201. On October 2011, D won won was awarded to C as the down payment among the lease deposit, and D won was awarded to C as the down payment.

However, in fact, although D did not intend to sell the above right to move into the above rental apartment from the beginning, it received the above money from the Plaintiff for the purpose of deceiving the down payment and the premium, and then arbitrarily cancelled the above lease contract and received the down payment from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and acquired the down payment and the premium paid by the Plaintiff. The Defendant, as an authorized real estate broker, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the down payment and the down payment amount of KRW 1,00,000, out of the down payment and the premium paid by the Plaintiff, as a brokerage commission, to the Plaintiff in order with C, G, H, I, etc., as well as C, I, and in arranging the sale and purchase of the above right to move into the Plaintiff in order to have the right to move into the leased apartment house acquired through normal procedures, and there is no problem with the knowledge that D was prohibited from resale of the right to move into the leased apartment house, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said down payment and the premium for delay.

B. The defendant only introduced the right to move into the J on behalf of the defendant I, and there was no fact that the defendant entered into a delegation contract with the plaintiff or participated in the tort due to the payment of brokerage commission, etc. for the sale of the right to move into the instant case.

2. In full view of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence No. 2, the defendant entered the receipt of KRW 22,00,000 prepared by I as his agent on September 19, 201, the telephone number and his name under the name of I.D.

arrow