1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked, and the revoked part.

Facts of recognition

The plaintiff is the management body of the apartment of this case as the council of occupants' representatives of A apartment at the time of Jinjin-si (hereinafter referred to as "the apartment of this case"). The defendant is a person who owns or owned each section of exclusive ownership stated in the separate sheet column among the apartment

(including from April 2017 to June of the same year) The Defendant paid the unpaid management expenses of J, K, L, M, N,O, P, Q, Q, R, and T from among the instant apartment after the date of the pronouncement of the first instance judgment in the attached list among the instant apartment.

The number of houses did not pay 20,926,120 won in total of management expenses and reserves for long-term repairs from April 2017 to June 2017 of each section of exclusive ownership as indicated, and 352,030 won in total of the base arrears on August 10, 2017.

(A) The defendant asserts that the management expenses and late payment fees of subparagraph G, H, and I in the attached list are already paid, but there is no evidence to acknowledge them. [No evidence to acknowledge them] According to the fact that there is no dispute, each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the above fact of finding the purport of the whole pleadings, the defendant has an obligation to pay to the plaintiff 21,278,150 won (=20,926,120 won) in total and the late payment fees of the management expenses and the long-term repair appropriations (352,030 won) and their management expenses and the long-term repair appropriations (20,926,120 won) from September 13, 2017, which is the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, that the defendant raised a dispute as to the existence and scope of his/her duty to act by the defendant from September 13, 2017 to April 18, 20199.

In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. Since the part against the defendant who ordered payment exceeding the above recognition scope in the judgment of the first instance is partially unfair, the defendant's appeal is partially accepted.