1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff asserts as follows. A. The plaintiff asserts as follows.

On August 19, 2010, the owners of each store among the W Commercial Building located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government V (hereinafter referred to as the "Commercial Building") decided to hold a management body meeting on August 19, 2010 to appoint X as the manager and then make a subsequent resolution on the management of the commercial building of this case. The plaintiff became the manager of the commercial building of this case through the subsequent resolution.

B. However, the Defendants agreed to the above resolution as owners of each shop listed in the attached Table of the real estate list among the commercial buildings of this case (hereinafter “the instant store”) and did not pay each amount indicated in the aggregate sheet of the claim amount in the attached Table, which is the management fee for the common areas of the instant store, to the Plaintiff.

C. At present, the Plaintiff directly occupies the instant store.

Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid management expenses, and to verify the Plaintiff’s lien for the instant store based on the unpaid management expenses.

2. The plaintiff has the authority to claim the management expenses for the store of this case only with the descriptions of the evidence Nos. 3 through 7, and Nos. 10 to 38.

or the plaintiff calculated management expenses accurately according to the common use of the store of this case.

or within the period of time the management fees calculated accurately are notified to the Defendants.

The plaintiff's management expenses claim and the right of retention based on the above management expenses claim are not reasonable, because it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff possessed the store of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statement Nos. 6 and 7, the Plaintiff concluded a management contract with the management body of the instant commercial building on August 1, 2010 and decided management expenses in consultation with the management body of the said management body, and also the instant case.