beta
Text
1. Defendant E and the Korean Licensed Real Estate Agent Association jointly share KRW 18,000,000 to Plaintiff B, and Defendant E with respect thereto.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiffs, respectively, leased part of the multi-family house through the brokerage of Defendant D, E, and F, and in the process of disposing of the leased object by auction, the Plaintiffs could not recover part of the lease deposit due to the existence of other lessees with prior priority and preferential right to payment.
Accordingly, the plaintiffs seek damages for violation of the duty to confirm and explain against the above defendants among real estate property, and seek the payment of mutual aid money from the defendant Korean Licensed Real Estate Agent Association (hereinafter "Defendant Association") which concluded a mutual aid agreement with the above defendants.
2. Facts premised on recognition;
A. On August 9, 2011, Plaintiff A’s loss of the deposit for lease was leased KRW 505 from H to KRW 60,000,00 among the multi-family houses of the building in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a broker of Defendant D. Plaintiff A completed the move-in report on August 24, 201 and obtained a fixed date regarding the said lease agreement. Plaintiff A had approximately KRW 1,020,000 (the maximum debt amount in the building in G building acquired from the bank of Korea Co., Ltd.) other than the 19 senior lessee (a total of KRW 1,138,000,000) in addition to the maximum debt amount in the building in G building at the time when Plaintiff A leased the said house.
Among them, Defendant D notified the Plaintiff that there are 50 households other than the above senior security right recorded in the register of register, and the total amount of the deposit was directly explained from H, a lessor.
3) The Plaintiff A received only KRW 32,727,212 out of the lease deposit (12,727,212 as lessee of small amount of KRW 20,00,00 as lessee) from the auction procedure (Seoul Southern District Court I) executed with respect to multi-family housing in G building, and did not recover the remainder of the lease deposit. The current status of Plaintiff A was difficult to receive a refund of the remainder of the lease deposit from H due to the lack of financial resources. (B) Plaintiff B lost the lease deposit of KRW 27,272,78, Nov. 24, 201.