logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.30 2015가단215228
부당이득금
Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in combination with the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 4 and Eul evidence 1 to 4 (including branch numbers), respectively.

The Plaintiff is a non-corporate entity that manages the instant building under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the “Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings”). The Plaintiff is an owner of the third floor of No. 301, No. 285.09 square meters, No. 302, No. 285.09 square meters, and the Defendant is a non-corporate entity that manages the instant building under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings.

B. The Plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership and dispute 1) Of the real estate in the attached Form No. 301, No. 285.09m2, No. 302, No. 285.09m2, No. 303, and No. 285.09m2 (hereinafter collectively, hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant exclusive ownership”).

(2) On November 30, 2011, the Plaintiff purchased the instant section for exclusive use on November 26, 2010, and paid the sale price, and thereafter the registration of ownership transfer was made under the name of the Plaintiff on December 6, 2010. (2) However, from November 2006, C, who was the former owner, failed to pay the public management expenses concerning the instant section for exclusive use from November 30, 201, before the Plaintiff acquired the instant section for exclusive use, and the amount of delinquent taxes was KRW 9,247,350, the amount of delinquent taxes was collected until November 30, 2010, before the Plaintiff acquired the ownership. The Defendant urged the Plaintiff to pay the public management expenses in arrears from March 201 to the Plaintiff.

3) Accordingly, the Plaintiff did not pay part of the Defendant’s above management expense claim on the ground that the extinctive prescription has expired, and the Defendant did not take procedures, such as a short circuit or a single set of water, but made it impossible to use electricity and water with respect to the instant section for exclusive use from June 15, 201. (C) On August 15:10, 201, the Plaintiff destroyed a fire wall installed in the section for common use on the third floor of the instant building, around August 15:10, 201, and around 10:00, around the same month, the Plaintiff destroyed the fire wall installed in the section for common use on the third floor of the instant building.

arrow