logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.05.25 2015가단242579
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a council of occupants' representatives comprised of the occupants of A Apartment, a multi-family housing in Geum-gu, Busan (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the defendant is a company that runs building entrustment management business, apartment house management business, cleaning service business, etc.

B. In around 2004, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a collective housing consignment management contract (hereinafter “instant management contract”) with the content that the Defendant is entrusted by the Plaintiff with the management of the instant apartment.

Since the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a re-contract before the expiration of the instant management contract, the instant apartment management contract continues to exist until now.

C. Meanwhile, on October 26, 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a cleaning service contract and a guard service contract with respect to the cleaning and guard of the instant apartment, separate from the instant management contract.

(hereinafter “instant cleaning security service contract”). D.

As the contract term of the instant cleaning security service contract expires on October 31, 201, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a renewal contract on November 1, 201, and concluded a renewal contract upon the expiration of the contract term on October 31, 2013, and the Defendant performed the cleaning security service of the instant apartment by the end of July 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, Gap evidence 1-2, 3, Eul evidence 1-1 to 19, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the details of the contract amount, which forms the basis of the contract for cleaning expenses in this case, include the details of personnel expenses for cleaning guards who will work in the apartment in this case, and the above personnel expenses include the national pension employer charges to be paid for cleaning guards employed by the Defendant.

This is that the defendant employs a cleaning guard who is less than the age limit for the national pension insurance.

arrow