logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.05.11 2017나5383
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Cbuilding (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) is an aggregate building consisting of one underground floor and six above ground. The Plaintiff, from D on April 16, 2013, acquired the right to lease and the right to operate food supply business on the first floor of the commercial building of this case (22% of the total area of the first floor; hereinafter “instant store”) from D, and occupied and used the instant store. The Defendant is the representative of the C Building Building Building Building 2, a managing body consisting of the sectional owners of the instant commercial building, to occupy and use the instant store.

B. In using the instant store, the Plaintiff paid the management expenses from April 2013 to May 2014 to the shopping mall, but did not pay the management expenses from June 2014 due to a dispute over the management expenses.

C. Accordingly, on April 21, 2015, the shopping district council filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for the claim of management expenses from the Changwon District Court 2015da1619, the Changnam District Court 2015 to March 2015 (hereinafter “instant management expenses claim lawsuit”), and the said court rendered a judgment against the Plaintiff to pay 1,400,053 won for unpaid management expenses from June 17, 2014 to March 2015 and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the next day to February 17, 2016.

The Plaintiff appealed against this, and filed an appeal with this Court No. 2016Na1605. However, the above court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on May 30, 2016, and the Plaintiff appealed with Supreme Court Decision 2016Da32445. However, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on September 30, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 12, 27, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The defendant's summary of the plaintiff's assertion.

arrow