beta
Text
1. Multi-family housing security services concluded on December 31, 2018 between Defendant C’s representative council and Defendant C Co., Ltd.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant apartment”) is a mixed housing complex under the Multi-Family Housing Management Act and consists of 11 and 169 households (5 households in the case of multi-family housing for the purpose of sale, and 114 households in the case of rental housing).
B. The Plaintiff is the council of lessees' representatives of the instant apartment among the instant apartment buildings established pursuant to the Multi-Family Housing Management Act to consult with E Corporation, a rental business operator, and the Defendant C council of occupants' representatives (hereinafter "Defendant C council of occupants' representatives") is in charge of decision-making on the management and operation of the sales household among the instant apartment buildings.
C. On February 20, 2018, the Defendant’s council of occupants’ representatives and the E Corporation entered into a contract with F Co., Ltd., a housing management operator (hereinafter “F”) to entrust the management of the instant apartment by setting the contract period from April 1, 2018 to March 31, 2020. The F appointed G B around the above contract date, and H on March 1, 2019 as the head of the instant apartment.
On December 29, 2016, with respect to the apartment of this case, a security service contract was concluded between three guards, 85,054,536 won per year, and the term of the contract from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018.
E. On December 31, 2018, with regard to the instant apartment, a security service contract was concluded between Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) and four guarded persons, 115,392,00 won per annum, and the term of the contract from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019.
(hereinafter “instant guard service contract”). The instant guard service contract was concluded by G, the head of the management office, following a resolution of the Defendant’s council of occupants’ representatives, and did not reach an agreement with E, the rental business operator during the process of the said contract.
[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, and Eul No. 1 to 4.