1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was established around May 12, 2009 for the purpose of managing and operating the shopping mall (hereinafter “D shopping mall”) which is the 7th underground floor in Jung-gu Seoul and the 16th apartment building (hereinafter “D shopping mall”).

The Plaintiff filed an application for the registration of the establishment of the shopping mall in this case pursuant to the Distribution Industry Development Act and received the registration certificate of the superstore from the head of the Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on April 22, 201, and on September 4, 2013, the head of the Gu accepted the Plaintiff’s report from the operator of the superstore, thereby dealing with the duties such as imposing and collecting management fees and claiming management fees for the unpaid operator of the shopping mall in this case as the qualifications of the operator

B. The Defendant is a sectional owner of the store No. 7177 and No. 7178 located on the seventh floor of the shopping mall building of this case (hereinafter “the store of this case”).

C. The Defendant did not pay KRW 4,222,30 (i.e., management expenses and late payment fees for each of the instant stores, which correspond to the period from January 2014 to May 2016 (i.e., unpaid management expenses KRW 3,476,780).

The fact that the sum of the unpaid management fees in arrears of the number of houses exceeds KRW 3,476,72,738,390 (372,760) KRW 2,111,738,390 (No. 7178), KRW 372,760 in total of KRW 3,476,780 in total of KRW 3,475,522,30 in total of KRW 3,445,520 in total of KRW 3,476,780 in total, KRW 745,522,30 in total of the unpaid management fees in arrears, the fact that there is no dispute over the ground for recognition, Gap evidence 1,2, and 3 (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence 3, and

2. According to the facts of the determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is a final and conclusive judgment at the court, which held that it is reasonable for the defendant to dispute the existence or scope of the obligation to perform as to the plaintiff, who is a superstore manager of the shopping mall of this case, as to the total amount of unpaid management expenses and arrears related to each of the stores of this case, and the unpaid management expenses of 3,476,780 won among them, from March 9, 2017, following the service day of the original copy of the payment order of this case.