1. On July 29, 2009, the Incheon District Court against the Plaintiff of the Young Development Corporation, Co., Ltd. by Defendant B.

1. The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by taking account of the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, Gap evidence 10 and 11.

On or around December 20, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired the ownership of Ctel 428 and 429, and the Korea Coastal Development Corporation, Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B’s acquisition Intervenor”) concluded a management service contract concerning the imposition and collection of management fees, etc. on the said building from the construction of Ctel and the seller of the said building on or around March 15, 2005, and imposed and collected management fees from the sectional owners of the said officetel until March 14, 2008.

On March 15, 2008, the management authority was terminated by the council of occupants' representatives after the termination of the management contract.

On July 17, 2009, the defendant takeover intervenor filed an application for payment order against the plaintiff, claiming that the plaintiff did not pay management expenses KRW 2,861,016 and management expenses of KRW 429 from November 2007 to KRW 428, and KRW 2,559,359. The judicial assistant E belonging to the Incheon District Court made an application for payment order against the plaintiff on July 29, 2009 that "the plaintiff paid to the defendant takeover intervenor KRW 2,861,016 and the amount at the rate of KRW 25% per annum from the day following the delivery of payment order to the day of full payment (Article 428) (Article 209j1501).

"The plaintiff shall pay to the participant acquiring the defendant 2,59,359 won and 25% interest per annum from the next day of service of the payment order to the day of full payment of the payment order. The plaintiff shall pay to the participant 209,1052 interest per annum.

"The payment order was issued respectively, and the plaintiff did not raise an objection even after receiving it, and all of the decision was made on August 21, 2009.

2. The party's assertion and its assertion

A. One of the parties' arguments is the management expenses from November 2007 to the time when the plaintiff applied for the payment order.