logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.06.17 2013가단29315
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s basic facts are licensed real estate agents operating the office of licensed real estate agents E located in Daegu Suwon-gu, the real estate agents operating the office of G Licensed Real Estate Agents located in Daegu-gu, and the real estate agents operating the office of G Licensed Real Estate Agents located in the office of G Licensed Real Estate Agents, Defendant B purchased on April 2, 2013, the Daegu Suwon-gu H large 889 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) by sharing one-third shares, respectively, with Nonparty I, J and one-third shares.

The real estate in this case was owned by Nonparty L, the president of K Incorporated Foundation, and three others. However, the seller’s practice related to the sale and purchase of the real estate in this case was N, the head of MG administration office under the said legal entity.

O, as a broker assistant of the Plaintiff, was divided into Defendant B (P and Q) and above N for the sale and purchase of the instant real estate, and talking about the sales price and other terms and conditions of the instant real estate.

The sales of the instant real estate was finally concluded on April 2, 2013 as the brokerage by Defendant C, and the contract was concluded on April 2, 2013 (the sale price of KRW 1,802,30,000), and the ownership transfer registration was made on April 29 of the same month.

As the special terms of the contract, the removal of the carp, which was being installed and operated in the real estate of this case, was decided to be the seller's responsibility, and the defendant C was to deal with the business.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 5, 6, 7 evidence, Eul 1 to 4 evidence (including a Serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. Defendant B, who became aware of the instant real estate throughO, visited the Plaintiff’s office, and identified the current status of the instant real estate throughO, and hadO make sure of the purchase price of the instant real estate.

Nevertheless, Defendant B and Defendant C concluded a sales contract with the seller of the instant real estate with the seller of the instant real estate, without excluding the Plaintiff (orO) by combining with Defendant C, resulting in the sales brokerage of each of the instant real estate.

arrow