A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. shall pay KRW 56,419,370 as well as its full payment from November 27, 2014 to the date of full payment.

1. In the south-si, A apartment was the apartment house consisting of 16 units, consisting of 8 units, 372 units, 372 units, and 462 units, 16 units, 8 units, and 834 units;

2. The occupants and users of the apartment complex of the second apartment complex (hereinafter referred to as the apartment complex of this case only for the apartment complex of A apartment complex) decided to manage the second apartment complex separately from the first apartment complex. On September 2007, the council of occupants' representatives was formed with respect to the second apartment complex of this case, and the management rules of only the apartment of this case were separately enacted. On February 1, 2008, E formed a council of occupants' representatives elected as the president (hereinafter referred to as the "former council of occupants' representatives") and completed the report on the organization of the South-ju City Mayor in accordance with the Housing Act.

3. After that, around September 18, 2008, the former council of occupants' representatives concluded an entrustment management agreement with Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Defendant Co., Ltd.") on the instant apartment management.

- Defendant D was the vice president of the Defendant Company, and Defendant C, who had been employed from around October 2008 to around December 1, 2009 from around September 2, 2009, and from around September 1, 2009 to around December 1, 2009, stated consistently that Defendant C was working as “management office” in the apartment management office of this case, and did not have a regular management office. However, the official seal (hereinafter “C”) was attached to various disbursement resolutions and substitute slips, etc. submitted by the Defendant himself, and written that Defendant C was a “management office” in B/3 (written claim) attached to the summary summary issues arranged by the Defendant on January 19, 2015.

The above legal action is not accepted.

However, the plaintiff's assertion on this part is rejected because there is no evidence to prove that the position of the defendant C was the chief of the management office, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant C participated in the illegal act due to embezzlement.