1. The defendant shall pay 8,324,695 won to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the management body of the Empha shop located in Busan Metropolitan City Empha City 2, and the defendant is the sectional owner of Empha shop with the eightth floor of Empha.

B. On February 2015, 2015, the management expenses for the portion of the management expenses for the portion of the eight storys are KRW 5,550,950, and the management expenses for the portion of April 2015 to December 2, 2016 are KRW 87,397,620, while the management expenses for the portion of March 2015 are KRW 4,171,910, while the management expenses for the portion of KRW 4,171,910 from January 2017 to August 2017 are the sum of KRW 38,620,290.

C. The overdue rate of management expenses under the current management rules of the Plaintiff is as follows:

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 12 through 15, 28, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. From February 2015 to August 2017, the Defendant delayed payment of management expenses from February 2017. As of October 20, 2017, the sum of the management expenses overdue by the Defendant and the management expenses from February 20, 2015 to August 20, 2017, based on the overdue rate determined by Einck Co., Ltd. (4% per month overdue, and 1.5% per month plus 1.5% per month) is 57,92,670 won.

Since the defendant paid KRW 42,792,238 among them, it is liable to pay the remainder of KRW 15,130,432 and delay damages.

B. The Defendant paid all unpaid management expenses by December 12, 2017.

However, the reason why the Defendant did not pay the management expenses was to avoid the risk of double payment due to disputes over the management authority between Einck and Einceptiona management body, which was commenced from February 2, 2015, and thus, it is unreasonable to impose the Defendant a late payment charge on the Defendant from February 2, 2015 until January 10, 2017, which was objectively confirmed that the Plaintiff was the legitimate management expenses.

In addition, the overdue rate is currently not the overdue rate determined by Einck Co., Ltd. which is the former controlled entity.