1.The judgment of the first instance, including a claim extended and reduced in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff is a sectional owner and occupant of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Btel (hereinafter “instant officetel”) No. 520, and the Defendant is a non-corporate body, a managing body of the instant officetel.

The Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff should pay the unpaid amount of KRW 2,464,230 as management expenses for the portion of May 2015, 2015 (i.e., the unpaid amount of KRW 160,410 per month (2,063,180).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 9, plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and plaintiff's assertion of parking lot repair and maintenance expenses are not included in ordinary management expenses. Thus, the resolution of the management body meeting to collect them must be adopted.

In other words, the defendant has no management rules, and the management affairs are performed according to the resolution of the management body meeting in accordance with Article 31 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings, but it was illegal since it imposed the parking lot repair and maintenance

In addition, since the instant officetel parking lot is the co-owned property of the sectional owners and tenant including the Plaintiff has already paid management expenses for the shares of common use including the parking lot, collecting the cost per household parking is illegal as it constitutes double-taxation.

Therefore, among the details imposed by the Defendant as management expenses for the portion of May 2015 on the instant officetel B 520, the principal imposed on the Plaintiff as the maintenance expenses for the parking lot repair and maintenance expenses for a total of 40 months from January 2012, February 2012, April 2012, April 2012, and May 2015, and the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Defendant for the arrears of KRW 1,200,234,230 does not exist.

Judgment

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the statements Nos. 1 and 2-2, Nos. 3-1, 6-1, and 2-2 of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2-2, the fact that the Management Regulations (hereinafter “the Management Regulations”) were enacted at “B Building Owners Management Council,” which is the autonomous organization of the instant officetel, around 192.