1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except where the Defendant added the following “2. additional judgment” as to the assertion emphasized by the court of first instance, and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. The Defendant asserts that even if a resolution to amend the management regulations made on July 16, 2015 at the general meeting of the Plaintiff managing body is valid, the amendment to the management regulations that calculates management expenses at KRW 7,500 per square year shall be limited to management expenses incurred after July 15, 2015, and that the amendment to the management regulations that was made after July 15, 2015 shall not be applied retroactively to June 3, 2013.

According to the records of Gap evidence No. 1 (the management rules), the general meeting of the plaintiff management body (the plaintiff management body) shall adopt a resolution on ① the establishment, amendment, and repeal of the rules, ② the appointment and dismissal of the president and officers of the management body, ③ the approval of the settlement plan of management expenses, ④ other matters presented at the meeting by other resolution of the management body (Article 19 subparagraph 1), and the matters concerning the enactment and amendment of regulations (referring to management regulations) within the management body comprised of one president, one vice president, one vice president, two auditors, and one executive secretary, ② the management expenses, special repair expenses, special repair expenses, other expenses to be borne by the sectional owners and the occupants, and other matters concerning the operation (Article 18 subparagraph 2 and Article 19 subparagraph 2). Meanwhile, it is reasonable to view that the management expenses decision is expressed as a management body composed of executive officers.

Meanwhile, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 22, 24, and 27, the Plaintiff’s transfer management regulations stipulate that general management expenses shall be KRW 6,000 per square meter, in the case of a factory laboratory, KRW 70% for a ground store, and KRW 50% for an underground store, but at the meeting of the executives of the Plaintiff management body, the Plaintiff’s transfer management regulations stipulate that only KRW 6,00 for an underground store shall be imposed.