logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.16 2014가합61343
관리비
Text

1. The plaintiff

A. As to Defendant B’s KRW 16,449,722 and KRW 9,429,68 among them, Defendant B shall be from April 19, 2014 to September 30, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a management body established pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Act”) consisting of all sectional owners of “A”, which is an aggregate building of the first basement in Suwon-si Q, and the fifth floor above ground, which is a management body established pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the

B. Defendant B’s sectional owners under 101 among the instant commercial buildings; Defendant C’s sectional owners under 102 among the instant commercial buildings; Defendant D’s sectional owners under 103, 104, and 105 among the instant commercial buildings; Defendant E’s lessee under 103, and 104 among the instant commercial buildings from December 2, 2010 to June 2016; Defendant C’s sectional owners under 106 among the instant commercial buildings; Defendant G, and H shared one-half shares under 108 and 109 among the instant commercial buildings; Defendant I, from April 1, 201 to March 201, from October 21, 201, from October 1, 2010 to May 10, 2010 to June 21, 2016; Defendant D’s above sectional owners under 10-2, from October 2, 2010 to 10-2, 2012

C. From around 1997, the Defendants were organizing and managing the instant shopping mall. However, there was no disagreement between the owners of the upper floor and the lower sectional owners on the management of the instant shopping mall, and even though the number of rooftop stories occurred, the conflict that did not repair it at the prosperity conference of the Defendant side was further deepened.

The plaintiff, on behalf of the sectional owners of the above-storys of the commercial building of this case, was entitled to take charge of the management of the commercial building of this case from June 2008. However, the defendants called a meeting around August 2008.

arrow