logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.07.05 2017나54465
관리비
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s status 1) The Plaintiff is the 7th underground floor located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and the 16th apartment building “D shopping mall” (hereinafter “instant shopping mall”).

(2) The Plaintiff applied for the establishment registration of the shopping mall in this case pursuant to the Distribution Industry Development Act, and received a superstore registration certificate from the head of Jung-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City on April 22, 201, and on September 4, 2013, the head of the Gu received the Plaintiff’s report from the operator of the large-scale store on September 4, 201, thereby performing duties such as imposing and collecting management expenses and claiming management expenses for the unpaid operator of the shopping mall in this case as the qualification of the superstore manager from that time.

B. The Defendant is a sectional owner of the six-story No. 6075 and No. 6076 of the shopping mall No. 6 (hereinafter “each of the instant stores”).

C. The Defendant did not pay KRW 4,222,30 (i.e., management expenses and late payment fees for each of the instant stores during the period from January 2014 to May 2016 (i.e., unpaid management expenses KRW 3,476,780).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each branch number in the case of additional number), Eul evidence Nos. 12 and 35, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff, who is the superstore manager of the shopping mall of this case, the unpaid management expenses and late payment fees for each of the stores of this case, barring special circumstances.

I would like to say.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. As to the assertion that the Plaintiff did not have the right to collect management expenses, the Defendant is not a management body of the shopping mall of this case, and the Plaintiff’s registration of the superstore manager is the Distribution Industry Development Act and the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”).

requirements set forth in the provisions of this subsection.

arrow