1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 3,226,120 and its amount on January 4, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the management body of the apartment of this case as the council of occupants' representatives consisting of 203 households of the tenant of the Jinjin-si B apartment (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"). The defendant owned 133 households of the apartment of this case and is the company leasing the apartment of this case.

B. According to Article 13 of the Management Rules of Apartment Housing (Evidence A No. 4), where an occupant leases his/her house to a user, the occupant is responsible for the overdue portion, such as management fees, user fees, etc.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s ground for the Plaintiff’s claim was that the Defendant, the owner of the instant apartment Nos. 212, 308, 1412, 1502, 1512, 1610, 1701, and 312, did not pay management expenses of KRW 7,055,580 (i.e., the amount imposed (= KRW 6,455,420 arrears of KRW 528,750 and KRW 71,410) as shown in the list of the details of the Plaintiff’s payment of management expenses (i.e., the amount imposed). The Plaintiff sought payment of the said money.

3. Determination

A. The Defendant asserts that all the management expenses claimed by the Plaintiff were paid by the Defendant, and that the Plaintiff received all the money equivalent to the monthly management expenses for the year of imposition from the Defendant or the lessee in relation to Nos. 1 through 6, 26 through 47, and 57 through 62 of the list of the details of the Plaintiff’s management expenses in arrears for the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff, while the Plaintiff asserts that the money was appropriated to the management expenses for the period during which the Defendant did not pay the management expenses (hereinafter “excess management expenses”), and that the Defendant did not pay the monthly management expenses for the year of imposition.

Therefore, according to the records of evidence No. 4, it can be recognized that the payment of management fees, etc. under Article 65 (3) of the apartment management rules of this case should be made first from the delinquent management fees, etc., but only the above provisions are stipulated.