2. Of the appeal costs, the part pertaining to the participation in the appeal is the intervenor joining the Plaintiff.

Therefore, it is accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act as it is.

2. The further determination of this Court

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff did not have an obligation to pay to the Defendant the unpaid management expenses for each real estate of this case; and (b) there was no obligation to pay the unpaid management expenses for each real estate of this case.

(1) Under the agreement of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant around October 2009, the defendant cannot seek payment of management expenses incurred after the successful bid was awarded to the third party.

(2) The Defendant did not properly provide the Plaintiff with management services regarding each of the instant real estate.

B. (1) First, we judge the meaning of the instant agreement.

According to the facts admitted by the first instance court and the evidence presented earlier, even after the payment of the successful bid price for each of the instant real estate was made, the Plaintiff paid all the management expenses for each of the instant real estate until January 2014, and paid some of the management expenses for each of the instant real estate after May 2015.

However, there is no evidence suggesting that the Plaintiff sought the return of the management expenses that the Defendant paid to the Defendant after the successful bid price of each of the instant real estate was paid, on the ground that the Plaintiff was not obligated to pay the original obligation.

In addition, the defendant cannot collect management expenses from the successful bidder of each real estate of this case as long as the plaintiff continuously occupies each real estate of this case while exercising the right of retention on each real estate of this case.

Nevertheless, each of the instant cases where the Defendant suffered economic loss.