logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 천안지원 2015.10.01 2015고정375
주택법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who works as the head of the Dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and the head of the management office of the D apartment in Yananan

The management entity of multi-family housing shall manage the multi-family housing in accordance with an order issued under this Act, and prepare monthly books concerning all transaction activities, such as the collection, keeping, deposit, and execution of management expenses, etc., and keep them together with evidential documents for five years from the end of the relevant fiscal year, and where the occupants and users request perusal of books, evidential documents, and other information prescribed by Presidential Decree or make a request for reproduction at their own expenses, it shall comply with

Nevertheless, on October 12, 2014, the Defendant demanded data copying on the “the details of the use of reserve funds from May 1, 2012 to October 12, 2014” by the occupant E of the above apartment No. 109-dong 204, Dong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, and D apartment management office. However, the Defendant did not comply therewith.

In this regard, the Dong-gu Office issued a corrective order by sending to the defendant a public letter of the title "the corrective order for the violation of the Housing Act" as of November 3, 2014, and "the urging to implement the corrective order for the violation of the Housing Act" as of December 4, 2014, but the defendant did not comply with it without good cause.

2. Where a person, who has been issued a corrective order by an administrative agency pursuant to Article 91 of the Housing Act, has violated it, such corrective order shall be lawful in order to punish him/her pursuant to Article 98 subparagraph 12 of the Housing Act; and as long as such corrective order is deemed illegal, a violation of Article 98 subparagraph 12 of the Housing Act cannot be established.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do824, Jun. 25, 2009). According to Articles 21(1), 21(4), and 22 of the Administrative Procedures Act, where an administrative agency imposes a duty on a party or imposes a disposition restricting his/her rights and interests, the facts and details of the prior disposition and legal basis therefor.

arrow