1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

A. The Plaintiff is liable for delay (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da59237, Dec. 9, 2010), and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff claimed additional payment against the Defendant prior to the instant lawsuit. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim regarding the portion exceeding the above recognized amount is without merit.

. Management expenses and additional 2. Management expenses x 8. Management expenses x 1. Management expenses x 2. Management expenses x 1. Management expenses x 2. 8. : 10,00 won from August 20, 2006 to August 19, 2007 to 80,000 won from August 20, 2007 to 10. 10,000 won from August 13, 2008 to 104, 104, 00 won from August 20, 2008 to 104, 100. 6. 0. 8. 0, 00 won from August 20, 200 to 10. 8. 20, 00 won from 105 to 100. 8. 20,00 won from August 13, 200 to 19, 2008

B. The defendant's argument (1) is that the defendant's argument is without merit since he agreed to pay 240,000 won for the future management expenses every five years after entering into a graveyard sale contract with the plaintiff around August 21, 1981. Thus, the plaintiff cannot claim management expenses raised thereafter to the defendant, and since he did not notify the defendant of the increased management expenses in advance, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.

(2) It is not sufficient to acknowledge that there was an agreement as alleged above solely on the basis of each description of evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Rather, unlike the defendant's assertion, according to the evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the defendant is the management fee from Aug. 20, 1991 to Aug. 19, 196, and the management fee from Aug. 20, 1996 to Aug. 19, 191.