1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 53,715,200 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 15, 2017 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a management body established pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Ownership, Management, etc. of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the instant building”) for the purpose of carrying out a project on the management of the building site and attached facilities in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seocheon-si, and the Plaintiff is a management body established pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Ownership, Management, etc. of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”). The Plaintiff is a person who is the fifth to seventh floor owner of the instant building, and

B. On February 22, 2016, the Plaintiff sent a certificate of content demanding the Defendant to perform the rooftop waterproof construction works, which occurred on the rooftop which is a common part of the instant building, but the Defendant failed to perform the rooftop waterproof construction works, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with E and F to enter into a project agreement on the rooftop waterproof construction works and paid KRW 30 million to E as the construction cost after completing the rooftop waterproof construction from March 2017 to May 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 8, 10 evidence, Eul evidence 1, 3, 5 through 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion has caused water leakage on the rooftop, which is the section for common use of the instant building, and the Defendant refused to request repair works to the Defendant, and the Plaintiff directly performed waterproof construction and disbursed KRW 5.7 million as the construction cost. The Plaintiff sought reimbursement of KRW 53,715,200, which is the appraised amount recognized as the appropriate construction cost of the said waterproof construction.

(B) Although the plaintiff stated that he sought compensation for damages, the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid the construction cost by performing instead of the plaintiff's work for the section for common use, which is the defendant's office work.

Article 23-2 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings provides that the management body needs the common interest for the management and use of the building.