(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.24 2017나4635 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.24 2017나4635

관리비

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that operates the management business of apartment houses, buildings, commercial buildings, and other facilities, and is engaged in the business of imposing and collecting management fees and claiming management expenses for the unpaid persons for the Incheon Livestock Product Department Store (hereinafter “instant building”), which is an aggregate building in Seo-gu, Incheon, Seo-gu.

B. The Defendant is the sectional owner of the store Nos. 301, 302, and 303-1 located on the third floor of the instant building (hereinafter “each of the instant stores”).

C. The sum of the unpaid management expenses and late payment charges from April 2010 to February 2016 is KRW 8,015,589.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence 1 to 10 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. According to the above facts in light of the judgment on the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of the unpaid management expenses and late payment fees for each of the stores of this case, and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from February 10, 2017 to the date of full payment, as claimed by the Plaintiff, from February 10, 2017 to the date of full payment, as the Plaintiff seeks.

B. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant alleged that, in the case of the public part located on the third floor of the building of this case, the public part of the building of this case is not the common part of the floor for the building of this case, but the whole public part for the building of this case, and thus, the defendant's management expenses should be reduced. However, in light of the structure of the building of this case and the form of use of the building of this case, there is no ground to recognize that the area classified as the public part of the third floor of this case is actually a whole public part. Thus, the defendant's argument is without merit. Further, the defendant is the revenue and the public part

참조조문

-소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.08.23 2017나5357

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.11.17 2017나116

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.06.14 2017나43694

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.12.18 2017나80723

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.28 2016나25866