logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.07.05 2019구단6004
영업정지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As a licensed real estate agent, the Plaintiff is operating the building B and the D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office (hereinafter “Plaintiff’s office”).

Nonparty E is also a licensed real estate agent, and after completing employment report as a licensed real estate agent affiliated with the Plaintiff’s office on November 2017, Nonparty E worked at the Plaintiff’s office from that time.

B. On May 4, 2018, at the Plaintiff’s office, a lease agreement was made between the lessor and the lessee of the F apartment G (hereinafter “instant housing”) with H and the lessor as the lessor.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant brokerage”) C.

On August 24, 2018, the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent affiliated with the Plaintiff’s office, did not sign and seal on the above lease agreement and the confirmation manual of the object of brokerage, and did not violate Articles 25(4) and 26(2) of the Licensed Real Estate Agent Act, thereby suspending the Plaintiff’s business for six months.

On December 3, 2018, the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission filed an administrative appeal against the above disposition of business suspension, while recognizing the existence of the grounds for the above disposition of business suspension on December 3, 2018, it made a ruling to revise the disposition of business suspension for six months on the ground that the disposition of business suspension was somewhat excessive compared to the Plaintiff’s violation.

(2) Each of the statements in Evidence No. 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, and 13, and the purport of the entire pleadings and arguments No. 1, 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, and 13, which have been reduced by the above ruling among the dispositions of the first time of the suspension of business (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The essence of the non-existence of a disposition 1 of the Plaintiff’s assertion is to participate in the conclusion of the transaction contract and perform the duty of the client to confirm the contents of the transaction contract and the object of brokerage.

Therefore, even licensed real estate agents are licensed.

arrow