beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff acquired the shares of 1/2 of the instant building on January 22, 2013 by jointly purchasing the E-building Nos. 801 and 901 of the 8th floor and 901 of the 9th floor (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant building”) located in Kuyang-si, Nam-si, and paying the sales price in full. In accordance with Article 18 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the “Aggregate Buildings Act”), the Defendants succeeded to the liability to pay total of 323,129,78 of the management expenses in arrears and the value-added tax thereon among the management expenses in arrears by all owners of the instant building. From January 222, 2013 to May 2013, the Defendants did not pay total of 20,456,060 won out of the management expenses in question.
The Plaintiff, as a management body under Article 23 of the Multi-Family Building Act, sought payment of the amount stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendants, among the delinquent management fees (=323,129,788 won 20,456,060 won) from the status of the manager or management company entrusted with the management of the commercial buildings of this case by the management body of the commercial buildings of this case as a management body under Article 23 of the Multi-Family Building Act.
B. The Plaintiff’s assertion is not a manager elected at the assembly of the commercial building management body, and even if the Plaintiff was elected as a manager, the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of management expenses against the Defendants was instituted by a person who is not qualified for the Plaintiff, and thus, it is inappropriate to collect management expenses, and even if not, the Plaintiff is not in the status of the manager, and thus, the Plaintiff cannot collect management expenses, and there was no debt claimed by the Plaintiff or the statute of limitations expired.
2. In the lawsuit claiming the performance of the judgment on the defendants' defense prior to the merits, the person claiming that himself/herself has the right to demand performance shall be the plaintiff, and the plaintiff shall be the administrator.