logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.11.08 2018노1075
공인중개사법위반
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding and legal principles 1) The Defendant, as an authorized broker for the opening of a business, arranged a sales contract on E forest land E 798 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”). However, the Defendant merely used a sales contract stating “H of the G Authorized Brokerage Office H” on the part of an authorized broker for the opening of a business with the intent of having H receive the instant forest land as an object of brokerage due to the lack of economic circumstances. As such, the Defendant did not perform brokerage by using another person’s name or trade name.

2) As the Defendant did not receive brokerage fees, the Defendant provided brokerage services.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 700,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a certified broker who operates the “C Authorized Brokerage Office” in the C Authorized Brokerage Office in the C, Syang-si.

In spite of the fact that anyone is prohibited from acting as a broker by using another person's name or trade name, on June 11, 2015, he/she rendered brokerage services in his/her name as a broker under the name of H of "G Official Brokerage Office" which is irrelevant to the act of brokerage, while mediating a sales contract between D and buyer F with respect to the forest land of this case owned by D at the above brokerage office.

B. The lower court determined that the Defendant was guilty of the instant facts charged on the ground that the Defendant used the name and trade name of H, who is another person, even though he/she performed a substantive intermediary act, such as physical color of the purchaser of the forest land of this case, by comprehensively taking account of the following evidence.

(c)

Article 19 (2) of the Act on the Mediation and Decision-Making of Authorized Persons provides brokerage services using another person's name or trade name, or uses another person's brokerage office registration certificate by taking over or lending it.

arrow