logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.07.01 2016나51010
중개수수료
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

Reasons

1. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant and C concluded a sales contract with the Plaintiff, a real estate broker, to sell and sell the land and building D (hereinafter “instant real estate”) for KRW 1.7 billion on July 1, 2014 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, it is recognized that the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 16.8 million as the brokerage commission under the instant sales contract, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the brokerage commission under the agreement.

However, the legal relationship between a real estate broker and a client is the same as the delegation relationship under the Civil Act. However, in principle, a mandatory may claim the full amount of remuneration when agreed on the amount of remuneration under a delegation contract in principle. However, considering the circumstances of delegation, the process and difficulty of delegation, the degree of effort made by a delegating person, specific benefits that he/she gained in the course of performing his/her duties, and other circumstances revealed in the pleadings, if there are special circumstances deemed that the amount of remuneration unfairly excessive and thus contravenes the principle of trust and good faith or the principle of equity, he/she may claim only remuneration within the reasonable scope (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da107900, Apr. 12, 2012). Accordingly, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged in light of the following: (a) the Defendant, the buyer after the conclusion of the sales contract in this case, did not pay the part of the intermediate payment without resolving problems such as transfer of the right to collateral security, etc.; (b) the Plaintiff and the Defendant had been aware of some damages between the Plaintiff.

arrow