logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.10.29 2018가단5093546
추가분담금 청구의 소
Text

1. The Defendants are entitled to the Plaintiff’s additional charges as stated in the separate sheet and their respective additional charges from January 6, 2015.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an association established on November 30, 1997 with the purpose of implementing a reconstruction project for 31 units of apartment buildings and 3 units of commercial buildings within the AE apartment AF complex in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant project site”) and with the approval of the housing association on May 26, 1999.

Defendant 1 through 22 is the Plaintiff’s member.

The remaining Defendants, as a member of the Plaintiff, are co-inheritors of YY who died on December 26, 2015, respectively, and are wife (3/11) and children (2/11 of the inheritance shares).

The defendants' shares in the partnership are as shown in the attached Form.

B. On October 13, 200, the Plaintiff removed the apartment and commercial building of the instant project site with the approval of the project plan on October 13, 2000, and newly built AG apartment and obtained the approval of the completion on February 28, 2005, and publicly notified on June 28, 2007.

However, there is a problem that the Plaintiff could not transfer the ownership of the commercial building site among the business site in this case from some of the members who were sectional owners, so the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the transfer of ownership of the commercial building site and the lawsuit claiming the payment of settlement money against some of the sectional owners from 2008 to 2014.

C. On September 17, 2014, the Plaintiff deliberated on the cases of collection of additional charges at the 7th council of delegates opened on September 17, 2014 and the 8th council of delegates opened on October 7, 2014, and resolved to submit them to the special meeting of its members as an agenda item with the consent of 9 persons among the 14 representatives.

On November 20, 2014, the Plaintiff holds an extraordinary general meeting of its members (hereinafter referred to as “instant general meeting”) and collects an additional charge as an agenda item 3, on the ground that “The expenditure exceeding the cash held by the association is expected to occur due to the purchase amount of the current land and interest, litigation costs, general meeting costs, service costs, etc.”

arrow