Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Contract freedom and limits on a broker's agreed fee
Supreme Court, Feb. 12, 2026, 2025Da212052 (judgment)
Case name: 기타(금전)[신의성실 원칙 및 형평 원칙에 따라 부동산중개업자의 중개보수 청구를 제한할 수 있는지 문제된 사건]
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a broker and its client agreed a brokerage fee, may the broker's claim be limited to an appropriate amount because special circumstances make the agreed amount unjustly excessive and contrary to good faith or equity, and must the court state the rational basis for that limit clearly?
Holding
Yes on both points. Where a fee has been agreed, the broker may in principle claim the whole agreed amount; only exceptionally, where the agreed amount is unjustly excessive and contrary to good faith or equity, may the claim be confined to the amount regarded as appropriate. Because such a limit grants an exception to freedom of contract, the court must state the rational basis for it clearly.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
약정보수액이 부당하게 과다하여 신의성실 원칙이나 형평 원칙에 반한다고 볼 만한 특별한 사정이 있는 때에는 예외적으로 적당하다고 인정되는 범위 내의 보수액만을 청구할 수 있다. 그런데 이러한 보수 청구의 제한은 어디까지나 계약자유 원칙에 대한 예외를 인정하는 것이므로, 법원은 그에 관한 합리적인 근거를 명확히 밝혀야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
When there are special circumstances under which the amount of remuneration as agreed upon is unjustifiably excessive so as to be contrary to the principle of good faith or the principle of equity, as an exception, only the amount of remuneration within the extent deemed appropriate may be claimed. However, since such a limitation on the claim for remuneration is, after all, an acknowledgment of an exception to the principle of freedom of contract, the court must clearly state a reasonable basis therefor.
Disposition
Partly reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결 중 원고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 광주지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below in which the plaintiff lost is reversed, and this portion of the case is remanded to the Gwangju District Court.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
위임의 경위, 중개업무처리의 경과와 난이도, 투입한 노력의 정도, 중개의뢰인이 업무처리로 인하여 얻게 되는 구체적 이익, 그 밖에 변론에 나타난 여러 사정을 고려하여
Unofficial English translation
upon considering the circumstances of the entrustment, the progress and degree of difficulty of the handling of brokerage services, the degree of effort expended, the specific benefit that the client obtains as a result of the handling of such matters, and the various circumstances appearing in the oral argument
Factors
- 위임의 경위
- 중개업무처리의 경과와 난이도
- 투입한 노력의 정도
- 중개의뢰인이 업무처리로 인하여 얻게 되는 구체적 이익
- 그 밖에 변론에 나타난 여러 사정을 고려하여
Unofficial English translation
• the circumstances of the entrustment
• the progress and degree of difficulty of the handling of brokerage services
• the degree of effort expended
• the specific benefit that the client obtains as a result of the handling of such matters
• upon considering the various circumstances appearing in the oral argument, and
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2012. 4. 12. 선고 2011다107900 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2011Da107900 decided April 12, 2012
Decisions referred to
대법원 2012. 4. 12. 선고 2011다107900 판결, 대법원 2018. 5. 17. 선고 2016다35833 전원합의체 판결(공2018하, 1139)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
When the court reduces an agreed brokerage fee to an appropriate amount, what criteria fix the extent of the reduction?
The remand judgment in 2024Na80131, once the Gwangju District Court examines the concrete grounds, will show what evidence satisfies the duty to state a rational basis. Any later decision applying or altering the standard of Supreme Court Decision 2016Da35833, or an amendment to Articles 2 and 686 of the Civil Act, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “When the court reduces an agreed brokerage fee to an appropriate amount, what criteria fix the extent of the reduction?” vs Independent “What amount of the agreed brokerage fee is reasonable on the facts of this case?”
The primary reading asks for general criteria governing the extent of reduction, whereas the independent reading asks for the reasonable amount in this case.
약정보수액이 부당하게 과다하여 신의성실 원칙이나 형평 원칙에 반한다고 볼 만한 특별한 사정이 있는 때에는 예외적으로 적당하다고 인정되는 범위 내의 보수액만을 청구할 수 있다. 그런데 이러한 보수 청구의 제한은 어디까지나 계약자유 원칙에 대한 예외를 인정하는 것이므로, 법원은 그에 관한 합리적인 근거를 명확히 밝혀야 한다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Gwangju District Court, in its judgment of 11 April 2025 (2024Na80131), accepted only that the defendant had commissioned a person outside the case to buy up properties in the area for the apartments a regional housing cooperative planned to build, and that those properties thereby became the subject of brokerage. It then held that the fee agreed in each case was unjustly excessive and contrary to good faith or equity, weighing the circumstances of the commission, the progress and difficulty of the brokerage work, the effort the plaintiff put in, the concrete benefit the defendant would gain, and the statutory fee ceiling rate in force when the fee was agreed, and reduced each agreed amount by 50% of its own motion.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that, apart from the circumstances in which the plaintiff came to broker the sales contracts, the court below had made no examination or finding on the concrete grounds that could support the limit, relying on abstract circumstances alone. On that reasoning alone, no objective and rational ground for restricting the claim of the plaintiff, the broker, could be clearly identified. The court had thereby misread the law on limiting a broker's claim and failed to conduct the necessary examination, with an effect on the judgment, so the portion adverse to the plaintiff was reversed and remanded to the Gwangju District Court by unanimous decision.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which no brokerage fee has been agreed between the broker and its client, since the rule construes what may be claimed where an agreed fee exists.
- A case in which no special circumstances make the agreed amount unjustly excessive, so that the broker may claim the whole agreed amount in principle.
- A judgment in which the court below examined the concrete grounds for the limit and stated a rational basis for it, so that the defect this decision corrected is absent.
Record verification notes
Set each fee agreement in the file against the circumstances the Court listed, and gather the concrete facts showing how the commission came about, what the work involved and what the client gained. Then read the reasons of the judgment below to see whether they state an objective and rational basis for the reduction rather than abstract circumstances alone. Note that only the portion of the judgment below, the Gwangju District Court judgment of 11 April 2025 (2024Na80131), adverse to the plaintiff was reversed and remanded, so the remainder of that record stands unchanged.
From the official text
Points at issue
부동산중개업자의 위임사무처리에 관한 약정보수액이 부당하게 과다하여 신의성실 원칙이나 형평 원칙에 반한다고 볼 만한 특별한 사정이 있는 경우, 부동산중개업자의 보수 청구가 적당하다고 인정되는 범위 내로 제한되는지 여부(적극) 및 이 경우 법원은 그에 관한 합리적인 근거를 명확히 밝혀야 하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
Whether, where there are special circumstances under which the amount of remuneration as agreed upon between the parties for a real estate broker's handling of entrusted matters is unjustifiably excessive so as to be contrary to the principle of good faith or the principle of equity, the real estate broker's claim for remuneration is limited to the extent deemed appropriate (affirmative), and whether, in such a case, the court must clearly state a reasonable basis therefor (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
부동산중개업자의 위임사무처리 보수에 관하여 부동산중개업자와 중개의뢰인 사이에 약정이 있는 경우 부동산중개업자는 원칙적으로 약정보수액 전부를 청구할 수 있다. 다만 위임의 경위, 중개업무처리의 경과와 난이도, 투입한 노력의 정도, 중개의뢰인이 업무처리로 인하여 얻게 되는 구체적 이익, 그 밖에 변론에 나타난 여러 사정을 고려하여, 약정보수액이 부당하게 과다하여 신의성실 원칙이나 형평 원칙에 반한다고 볼 만한 특별한 사정이 있는 때에는 예외적으로 적당하다고 인정되는 범위 내의 보수액만을 청구할 수 있다. 그런데 이러한 보수 청구의 제한은 어디까지나 계약자유 원칙에 대한 예외를 인정하는 것이므로, 법원은 그에 관한 합리적인 근거를 명확히 밝혀야 한다.
Order
원심판결 중 원고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 이 부분 사건을 광주지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The portion of the judgment of the court below in which the plaintiff lost is reversed, and this portion of the case is remanded to the Gwangju District Court.
Provisions referred to
민법 제2조, 제686조
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger