1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a sectional owner or tenant of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Btel (hereinafter “instant officetel”) C and D.

The defendant is the managing body of the instant officetel.

B. The defendant imposed management expenses on the plaintiff, while the defendant imposed management expenses each month on the plaintiff, there are items such as parking lot repair and maintenance expenses among the details thereof.

The Defendant imposed management expenses for the portion of August 2016 on the Plaintiff as follows:

(1) Category C; 477,590 won (including item 105,00 won for parking lot repair and maintenance expenses), unpaid amount of 5,969,110 won, unpaid amount of 814,480 won, unpaid amount of 7,261,180 won in the payment period, 7,261,180 won in the payment period, 269,810 won (including item 30,000 won in the parking lot repair and maintenance expenses); 2,841,670 won in the payment period; 419,040 won in the unpaid amount of 419,040 won in the payment period; 3,430,520 won in the payment period; 3,520 won in the entire pleadings;

2. Of the management expenses that the Plaintiff alleged on the ground of the claim imposes on the Plaintiff each month, the items of the parking lot repair and maintenance expenses are not legitimate grounds for imposition.

The above parking lot repair and maintenance cost is the parking fee actually, and since the parking lot is the private property of the sectional owner, the manager cannot impose parking fees on the use of the parking lot by the sectional owner.

Therefore, the plaintiff did not pay the money of the items of the parking lot repair and maintenance expenses among the management expenses imposed by the defendant, which is the same as the amount stated in the claim.

(The Plaintiff did not pay the amount of expenses for maintaining and maintaining parking lots until now, and the sum of unpaid amounts at the time of August 2016 seems to be the amount stated in the purport of the claim). There is no obligation of the Plaintiff to state the purport of the claim against the Defendant.

3. Determination

A. If necessary for the maintenance and management of an aggregate building as a sectional owner, it is not possible to resolve the cost burden by itself.

B. Gap evidence Nos. 4-7, Eul evidence Nos. 1-8, all numbers.