In a case where a real estate broker provides a false information about important data in determining whether to conclude a contract with the client, whether he/she is liable to compensate the client for damages (affirmative)

Articles 25(1), 29(1), and 30(1) of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act; Article 681 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 et al. (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff (Law Firm Haok, Attorneys Jeong Young-hoon et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and one other (Attorney Yoon Young-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2005Na112118 decided May 2, 2008

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Even if a real estate broker does not bear an obligation to investigate and confirm and explain to a client, he/she shall not provide false information about matters which are important data for the client to determine whether to conclude a contract, and if he/she without properly verifying such false information, without delivering it to the client as if it is true, thereby causing the client to believe such information and enter into a contract with the other party, such act by the real estate broker is in breach of the broker's duty to faithfully act as a broker with the care of a good manager (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da3067 delivered on May 14, 199).

After finding the facts as stated in its holding, the court below held that since Defendant 1, a real estate broker, provided false information to the plaintiff without properly verifying the interest amount on the secured obligation regarding the secured real estate and the situation of the lease of the parking lot site in mediating the lease contract of this case, thereby causing damage to the plaintiff by having the plaintiff conclude the lease contract, the defendants are liable to pay the down payment and the intermediate payment to the plaintiff. The judgment of the court below is just in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence, such as misapprehension of legal principles as to the duty and causation of the real estate broker, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Justice)