1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management organization that consists of the owners and occupants of A Apartments in Si-si and C (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. From January 2008, the defendant is in office as the Dong representative and the third tenant representative of the apartment of this case from January 1, 2008.

July 17, 2008.

C. On October 29, 2011, the Plaintiff publicly announced the election of representatives for each Dong of the 6th council of occupants’ representatives, and from January 10, 201 to January 13, 2012, as a result of the election conducted by the Defendant on January 14, 2012, the Defendant was elected as the 101 representative and the chairperson, Nonparty E, F as the 201 representative, G as 203 representative, and H as 205 representative, respectively.

(hereinafter “instant decision on appointment”) D.

On January 30, 2012, the chairperson I et al. of the fifth apartment house of this case filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the appointment decision of this case against the plaintiff on the grounds that the Suwon District Court Branch Branch 2012Gahap867 decided August 30, 2012. On August 30, 2012, the above court accepted the claim of I et al. and confirmed that the appointment decision of this case was null and void. While the plaintiff appealedd as Seoul High Court 2012Na73617, the appeal was dismissed on February 21, 2013, and the judgment became final and conclusive as is

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant litigation”). (e)

Meanwhile, from January 2012 to February 2013, the Defendant received KRW 200,00 per month as the representative of occupants from January 2012 to February 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's 2, 6 evidence, Eul's 2-2 (including branch numbers in the case of additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. In full view of each of the evidence Nos. 1 and 6 of the judgment on the grounds of a claim for the return of unjust enrichment arising from the excessive payment of business promotion expenses from March 2008 to July 2008, Article 27(1) of the Management Rules of the apartment of this case, which was in force in around 2008, is the council of occupants' representatives, whether the council of occupants' representatives pays the operating expenses of the council of occupants' representatives necessary for performing its duties and the amount thereof.