(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.10.19 2016가단9802

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.10.19 2016가단9802

청구이의의 소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The plaintiff's assertion is that the defendant and C act as a broker for the transfer and acquisition contract of a private teaching institute between the defendant and C, and the mediation fee of KRW 5 million agreed upon by C was duly received, and even if the above contract was invalidated and revoked under the contract for transfer and acquisition of a private teaching institute between the defendant and C, the plaintiff does not have a duty to pay brokerage fees, and the contract between the defendant and C is still valid after only changing the amount of the premium due to deception of the number of private teaching institutes under C's contract for transfer and acquisition of a private teaching institute. Thus, there is no reason for the plaintiff

Therefore, compulsory execution based on the payment order stated in the purport of the claim that the defendant under the premise that he received the above brokerage fee refund claim from C should not be allowed.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 28, 2014, the Plaintiff and C agreed to divide C’s premium amounting to KRW 9 million and the Defendant’s remainder into service commission and consulting cost.

(hereinafter “instant recognition agreement”). (b)

On July 14, 2014, the Defendant, upon the Plaintiff’s introduction, agreed to acquire D private teaching institutes worth KRW 15 million (hereinafter “instant contract for the transfer of private teaching institutes”), paid KRW 4.5 million to C on June 28, 2014, the intermediate payment of KRW 5 million on July 7, 2014, and KRW 16.5 million to the Plaintiff on July 14, 2014. Of them, the Defendant paid KRW 1.5 million to the Plaintiff.

C. Article 10 of the instant contract for the transfer of a private teaching institute provides, “The consulting fee shall be paid by both the assignee and the transferee, at the same time as this right is concluded. The consulting service fee shall not be claimed in the event that the consulting is null and void, cancelled, or cancelled, without intention or negligence.” However, the Plaintiff did not sign and affix a seal on the instant contract for the transfer of a private teaching institute.

However, registration is made.

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2017.01.19 2016나9797

-의정부지방법원 2018.12.06 2017가단127944

-전주지방법원 2020.02.14 2019나862

-대전지방법원 2016.10.20 2016나4073

-인천지방법원 2018.05.04 2017가합55663