logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.11.06 2015나7273
관리비
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the money ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Reasons

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the overall purport of the statements and arguments stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers), the defendant owned the building Nos. 1714 at the port managed by the plaintiff on Nov. 23, 2009, and lost ownership by selling the building No. 1714 at a compulsory auction on Sept. 19, 2014, and the management expenses for the building Nos. 1714 at the above building No. 3,68,795 were incurred from Aug. 19, 2013 to Sept. 19, 2014, and the defendant may recognize the failure to pay them.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the unpaid management expenses of KRW 3,668,795 and the delay damages calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act and 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from January 17, 2015 to November 6, 2015, the following day after the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, as requested by the plaintiff, to the plaintiff.

B. The Plaintiff also sought payment of management expenses incurred from September 19, 2014 to October 2014 to the Defendant. However, the fact that the Defendant lost ownership under subparagraph 1714 of the above building A on September 19, 2014 is as seen earlier, and there is no reason for the Defendant to bear management expenses corresponding to the period that is not the owner. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

2. The defendant's assertion that according to the Supreme Court en banc Decision 2001Da8677 Decided September 20, 2001, the special successor of the apartment house succeeds to the delinquent management expenses for the common use area of the former tenant, and the defendant paid the unpaid management expenses for the common use area of the building A at the time when the ownership of the above building A 1714 was acquired, so the defendant's unpaid management expenses for the common use area of the building A shall claim for the new auction of the building A 1714.

arrow