logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 청주지방법원 2019.04.18 2016가단16382
관리비
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. A. (1) A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) completed the registration of ownership preservation on February 21, 2004 with respect to E-commercial buildings (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) with the fourth underground floor and nine above the nine-story above the ground located in Heung-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”). A around November 30, 2011, around November 30, 201, completed the registration of ownership transfer for Fhoho and G (hereinafter “instant store”) that were part of the instant commercial buildings to the Defendant on the ground of sale as of November 4, 201, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) on May 31, 2016.

B. The management entity of the instant commercial building is changed 1) The Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings”) as the sale of the instant commercial building began and its occupancy took place.

A) The E Management Body was established with all sectional owners. Around February 1, 2004, Company I (hereinafter “I”) established by C was appointed as the manager of E Management Body and managed the instant commercial building. 2) In the case of the request for dismissal of the manager filed by the sectional owners of the instant commercial building, the judgment that “I is dismissed from the manager of E Management Body” was rendered on or around January 18, 2013 (Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Da3811), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on or around February 14, 2013, the Daejeon High Court (Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Ra72, the Daejeon High Court (Cheongju District Court) rendered a provisional disposition against I on or around February 1, 2013, and the J was decided as the acting manager.

Since then, the commercial building of this case was actually managed by the J designated as acting person in the above provisional disposition decision.

3) On December 15, 2014, the Plaintiff’s representative K reports to the Cheongju market with the consent of 1/2 or more of the shop occupants of the instant shopping district pursuant to Article 12(2)2(d) of the Distribution Industry Development Act, and was newly granted the status of the superstore manager by the same method every six months. (iv) The Plaintiff was newly granted the status of the superstore manager by the same method every six months.

arrow