beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following order of payment shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a company primarily responsible for credit business, etc., and the Defendant is a person who lends his qualification as licensed real estate agent and name to H to operate an authorized brokerage business under the trade name “C Real Estate” in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
B. On January 30, 2013, the Plaintiff offered D a loan of KRW 80 million to D, and received from D a lease agreement (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) dated October 9, 2012, the lease deposit amount of KRW 180 million, the lease deposit amount of KRW 1505,00,000,000,000,000,000 from the lessor, E, lessee D, 3,000 and 1505,000,000,000,000,000 from November 9, 2012 to November 8, 2014.
Plaintiff
The person in charge of the above lease contract reported the above lease contract and judged that the loan of KRW 180,000,000 to KRW 80,000 as security would be sufficiently repaid, and the above loan was implemented.
In addition, on May 7, 2013, the Plaintiff determined that there is sufficient collateral value for the above lease deposit of KRW 180 million and loaned additional KRW 20 million at D’s request.
C. However, D does not have actually entered into a lease agreement with E.
H, who operated a licensed real estate agent office under the name and qualification of the Defendant, was actually not a broker of the apartment lease contract of this case, and did not confirm the present condition of the apartment of this case or the receipt of deposit money, which is a broker, upon D’s request, entered “C real estate A” as a broker, and prepared and issued a written confirmation of the object of the lease contract of this case and brokerage.
D The Plaintiff did not pay the principal and interest of KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff filed a complaint against D with the knowledge that the instant lease agreement was false, and D was sentenced to six months of imprisonment due to fraud, etc.
(Seoul Eastern District Court 2015No269). [Grounds for recognition] of absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10 (including the number of pages).