beta
Text
1. The Defendants: (a) each of the Plaintiff KRW 27 million; and (b) Defendant B was the Plaintiff of January 17, 2014, and the Defendant.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant B entered into a mutual aid agreement that the Defendant Association shall pay compensation in accordance with the terms and conditions of mutual aid to the parties to a transaction when it acts as a real estate broker by setting the amount of deduction with Defendant B as KRW 100 million and the period of deduction from June 29, 2013 to June 28, 2014, when it acts as a broker of real estate in the name of a person operating the real estate broker office D’s trade name, and the Defendant Korean Licensed Real Estate Agent Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) entered into a mutual aid agreement that the Defendant Association shall pay compensation in accordance with the terms and conditions of mutual aid to the parties to a transaction.
B. On September 24, 2013, the Plaintiff decided to purchase H and I land from F and G (hereinafter “instant land”). The Plaintiff remitted KRW 50 million to the agricultural bank account in the name of the Defendant B, KRW 35 million on September 24, 2013, ② KRW 35 million on October 2, 2013, ③ KRW 5 million on October 4, 2013, and KRW 90 million on October 4, 2013.
(hereinafter “this case sales contract”). 【No dispute exists, Party A’s evidence 1-2, Party A’s evidence 2, Party A’s evidence 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings.
2. The parties' assertion
A. Although the Plaintiff’s assertion concluded the instant sales contract as a broker by Defendant B and paid KRW 90 million, the Plaintiff demanded Defendant B to confirm whether the contract was normally concluded or the seller was made at the end of December, 2013, and Defendant B was locked with the purchase price, and F and G did not request the broker for the instant real estate.
Defendant B or Defendant B’s brokerage assistant E, even though he did not intend to act as a broker for the instant land, acquired KRW 90 million from the Plaintiff by deceiving the Plaintiff. As such, Defendant B is a tortfeasor or an employer of E, who is a tort, and the Defendant Association, as the mutual aid business entity of Defendant B, should pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 90 million and the damages for delay.
(b).