logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.04 2016나17476
양수금
Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff succeeding intervenor's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

2...

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a management service company of the shopping mall located in Jung-gu, Seoul and the 16th above ground (hereinafter “D shopping mall”). The Defendant is a sectional owner holding 75 and 76 of the five stories among the shopping mall of this case (hereinafter “the instant store”). The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor is a management body under the Act on the Management and Ownership of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”) established by a management body meeting composed of all sectional owners of the shopping mall of this case including the Defendant around February 21, 2009.

B. On May 31, 2014, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor transferred to the Plaintiff management expense claims against the Defendant, and on June 23, 2014, sent content-certified mail to the Defendant stating the fact of transfer.

Then, on February 23, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred to the Intervenor succeeding to the Plaintiff the management expenses claim against the Defendant again, and on March 4, 2016, notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the claims of the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor

A. The gist of the claim is that the Defendant, the owner of the instant store, is liable to pay the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor, who is the person liable to impose and collect management fees for each of the stores in the shopping mall in the instant case, the sum of the management expenses and late payment charges from September 2010 to December 2013, 11,806,700 for the management expenses and late payment damages for the principal amount of 8,521,380 for each of the stores in the shopping mall in the instant case.

B. In light of the legislative purpose and purport of the Distribution Industry Development Act in order to establish commercial transaction order and protect consumers through efficient and uniform maintenance and management of one superstore with respect to management expenses claims incurred after April 22, 201, the management body shall impose and collect management expenses on a superstore which is an aggregate building under the Aggregate Buildings Act.

arrow