beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. As to Defendant B and C, KRW 20,756,870 for each of them and Defendant B, from October 21, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts are the management body established by consisting of sectional owners of a building A located in the Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”). Defendant B, who was the Plaintiff’s manager from September 2006 to September 2014, did not dispute between the parties, or acknowledged by Eul’s evidence No. 1.
2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful
A. As to the Plaintiff’s seek against the Defendants the payment of balance, such as management expenses, return of unjust enrichment, and return of loan, Defendant B and C asserted to the purport that the Plaintiff’s representative F was not legally appointed as the manager at the meeting of the management body on June 4, 2014. Moreover, even if the Plaintiff was legally appointed as the manager, Defendant C lost the status of the manager by appointing the latter as the manager at the meeting of the management body on December 14, 2014. As such, the instant lawsuit filed with F as its representative was unlawful.
B. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the occupants of the building of this case appointed F as the president of the prosperity conference on May 28, 2014; the representative and executive officers of the management body; and the president of the management body; and the president of the management body appointed as the president of the management body on June 4, 2014; and the meeting held the management body meeting on June 4, 2014; and there was a discussion to the effect that "F was appointed as a new manager in the name of the plaintiff, not in the name of the organization, in the name of the management body; ③ Meanwhile, G Co., Ltd., which was the management company of the building of this case, lost the status of the administrator of the previous building by exercising its authority as the manager of the building of this case against F on February 13, 2015, while Defendant C lost his status as the manager of the building of this case.