beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant C is KRW 90,00,000 and KRW 5% per annum from May 29, 2015 to March 16, 2016 and from the following day.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant D is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business under the trade name, “F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office,” from around September 2001, and was closed on or around December 2015; Defendant C is a wife of Defendant D, who served as a broker assistant of Defendant D.
B. The Defendant Association concluded each of the following mutual aid agreements with Defendant D (hereinafter “instant mutual aid agreements”).
Common contents of mutual aid: Limit on compensation for losses suffered by the parties to a transaction where a real estate broker who has subscribed to mutual aid agreement intentionally or negligently causes property damage to the parties to a transaction while acting as a real estate broker: The scope of losses covered by the defendant Association shall be equivalent to the fault ratio of the parties to mutual aid, out of the amount which the members incurred property damage to the parties to mutual aid while acting as a real estate broker. The aggregate of the amounts of mutual aid agreements, regardless of the number of clients who suffered damage or the number of brokerage contracts or the amount of damage inflicted upon each client who suffered damage from the defendant Association during the period of mutual aid agreement, shall not exceed the amount of mutual aid subscription stated in the certificate of mutual aid (the amended terms of November 18, 2009, the "limit and scope of compensation"; hereinafter referred to as "this case's terms of mutual aid agreement") 50 million won or 100 million won subscription amount of mutual aid contract under Article 1.2 mutual aid agreement for each period of mutual aid agreement between the parties to mutual aid agreement and the 19.1.2.1.2 billion won
Defendant C introduced, around May 2009, residential buildings owned by G (H 911 Dong 207, hereinafter “instant apartment buildings”) to the Plaintiff as leased stores. On May 6, 2009, Defendant C introduced the so-called lease contract G to the Plaintiff.