1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,792,946 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from October 22, 2013 to December 4, 2014, and the following.

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or each of the statements in Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-1 to 5, Gap evidence 6, 7, Eul evidence 30, 31, and 38 can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the whole pleadings:

Around December 2010, the council of occupants' representatives entered into a contract on the consignment management of collective housing (hereinafter referred to as the "management contract of this case") with the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff Company (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff") on the apartment and its incidental facilities, and the management of welfare facilities with respect to the apartment and its apartment in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-si, Seoul (hereinafter referred to as the "the apartment of this case").

B. At the time of the instant management contract, the Plaintiff and the council of occupants’ representatives of the instant apartment were to set the contract term from January 1, 201 to December 31, 2013. The said council of occupants’ representatives agreed to transfer KRW 512,040 (including additional tax) to the Plaintiff’s account by the last day of each month the entrusted management fee for the Plaintiff’s management affairs.

C. The Defendant: (a) placed the Defendant as the head of the instant apartment management office upon hiring the Defendant as the head of the instant apartment management office; (b) rejected the Defendant’s request from the resident C of the instant apartment while working as the head of the management office to duplicate documents, such as the selection of the company and the bid amount, etc.; (c) filed an application against the Plaintiff for the inspection of the books and the disposal of the copies against the Plaintiff as Incheon District Court Branching 2012Kahap637; and (d) in relation to this, C, etc. filed an application against the Plaintiff for the temporary suspension of payment for the construction price as the above court 2012Kahap703.

Accordingly, on March 25, 2013, the Plaintiff brought a continuous application for disposition by reading and copying books for civil petitions to the Defendant, and replaced by the council of occupants' representatives.