beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s payment order against the Plaintiff is based on the payment order for unjust enrichment case of Seoul Western District Court 2015 tea 83923.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
Around February 2014, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a consulting agreement (hereinafter referred to as “A”) that delegates the Plaintiff the sales consulting service for A (hereinafter referred to as “A”) owned by the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “A”) to the Plaintiff.
The main contents of the instant consulting contract relating to the instant lawsuit are as follows.
(hereinafter referred to as "A" means the plaintiff, "B", and "A", Article 3 (Scope of Business Activities) will carry out the following duties as the main agent for the sale of the above real estate:
(1) Affairs related to the formulation of detailed procedures for the execution of sale and the management of procedures therefor.
1. A shall pay the first service cost within the limit of 10% to 20% of the commission for sale on the following table (based on the calculation of the service cost rate) where the sales contract was made in accordance with the Eul’s advisory report:
2.A shall pay the balance of service fees to B when a permit to dispose of the above real estate has been obtained and the sale has been completed and the purchase price has been deposited.
Article 10 (Termination and Rescission of Contracts)
1.In any of the following cases, the parties to this Agreement may terminate or terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the other party without any separate procedure:
except that a Party which is responsible for the occurrence of the following reasons may not cancel or terminate this Agreement on its ground:
② On March 2014, the Plaintiff prepared and submitted a consulting report to the Defendant where the violation was not cured even though the Plaintiff failed to perform his/her duties or the Plaintiff notified the Defendant to correct the violation, in violation of important obligations under this Agreement.
On June 2, 2014, Section B (State) and Section B (State) take over through the Plaintiff’s brokerage.