손해배상(기)
1. The Defendants jointly share KRW 9,380,320 with respect to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from January 1, 2015 to February 16, 2016.
1. The fact that the council of occupants' representatives, the plaintiff who is the plaintiff of liability for damages, held office in the council of occupants' representatives of A apartment, as the chairperson from December 4, 2010 to July 31, 201, and the defendant C as the managing director from December 1, 201 to December 31, 2014, respectively, may be recognized either by dispute between the parties or by the statement in subparagraph 1 to subparagraph 3.
However, if Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6-2 and 3 were written, and the result of fact-finding conducted by the North Korean Office of Gwangju Metropolitan City in this court, which shows the whole purport of oral argument, the defendants violated the management rules in performing the management affairs of Gap apartment, and voluntarily disbursed miscellaneous income to the officer of the council of occupants' representatives without going through a resolution of the council of occupants' representatives during the above service period of 2013 and 2014, and the amount is up to 9,380,320 won. According to the above A apartment management rules, if the members of the council of occupants' representatives cause damages to the occupants, etc. by intention or negligence, the fact that the defendants are liable for such damages can be acknowledged.
According to these facts of recognition, the defendants are jointly obligated to pay the above money and the damages for delay to the plaintiff.
2. Judgment on the remainder of the Plaintiff’s assertion
A. The remaining miscellaneous income Plaintiff asserted that the Defendants committed an illegal act in relation to the miscellaneous income expenditure in 201 and 2012. However, it is insufficient to acknowledge the facts of assertion only with the descriptions of Nos. 2, 14 through 18, 20, 19-1 and 2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, there is no reason to acknowledge it.
B. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants voluntarily used the operating expenses of the council of occupants' representatives without going through the resolution of the council of occupants' representatives against the above management rules. However, according to the evidence No. 1, it is difficult to view that the use of operating expenses under the management rules must necessarily undergo a resolution of the council of occupants' representatives.