관리비 등 청구의 소
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
A. Defendant U.S.’s KRW 6,789,787 and as to the Plaintiff, November 2017.
1. The reasoning of this Court’s explanation by the court of the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for partial dismissal as follows. Therefore, this is without merit by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The part of the first instance court's decision No. 7th 8 "AUhoho" is "BUhoho," the part of the first instance court's decision No. 11 is "BVho, BWho," and the part of the first instance court's decision No. 13 is "BXho, BYho," "BOho," and "BYho," respectively.
Inasmuch as the judgment of the first instance court is recognized as 12th 11th 12th 12th 12th 12th 12th 12th 200.
In addition, considering the purport of the above Act that recognizes the right to collect management expenses, etc. only to a legitimate management unit or manager under the Condominium Building Act, the Plaintiff cannot seek payment of management expenses, etc. from the owner of the AC consent (or the user) on the ground of the existing management contract entered into with the AC Building Management Unit.
‘Aro-friendly'.
Since the 12th 12th 21th 12th 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance commenced the “3 conduct,” the entire building of this case, “B,” the management body of the entire building of this case from January 3, 2017 to the Plaintiff from January 3, 2017, notified the Plaintiff that the management body of the entire building of this case, including AC, should no longer manage the entire building of this case, including AC,.
The 13th sentence to 16th sentence of the first instance court shall take the following measures from the 10th sentence to the 11th sentence:
B. (1) Determination of the Plaintiff’s claim (A) and the primary claim (A) against the Defendants (excluding the part against Defendant U from May 2013 to February 2017), as seen earlier, AC Building Management Body does not have the authority to entrust the Plaintiff with the management of AC consent for all of the owners of AC divided owners.
Even if AC Building Management Group is an unincorporated entity, and such entity has such authority;
In addition, the whole building management unit of this case is actually constituted, and the management unit of this case explicitly consists of the plaintiff's management duties against AC Dong.