logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2020.07.15 2020나20847
기타(금전)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court are justified even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court citing the judgment of the first instance is based on the evidence submitted in this court.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for the addition of the following ‘2. Additional Judgment' to the argument that the plaintiff emphasizes in this court, and therefore it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff asserts that the brokerage fee stated in Gap evidence 2-1 and 2 (the confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage, hereinafter "the confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage of this case") as the disposal document is not merely an example, but is written after consultation between both parties, so the brokerage fee should be recognized in accordance with the text.

B. If the contents of the disposal document are printed in the same text, it is nothing more than the printed text and it cannot be deemed as the content of the agreement. Thus, it cannot be readily concluded as the content of the agreement just because it is a disposal document, and it should not be determined as the content of the agreement by considering the parties’ intent in accordance with the specific case and whether it is merely an example.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da36231 delivered on November 28, 1997). C.

The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by integrating the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements in Gap evidence 2-1, 2, and Eul Nos. 1 through 3, namely, brokerage fees, in principle, are determined by mutual agreement between the client and the practicing licensed real estate agent within the scope of the upper limit set by the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act, etc. However, each of the confirmation and description of the object of brokerage of this case includes "27,90,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000: (3,100,000,000) x 0.90%, and the brokerage fees are paid.

arrow