The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Article 15 of the former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 8852 of Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter “former Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents”) provides that “The Promotion Committee for the Establishment of Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as the “Promotion Committee”) shall report the duties performed by the Promotion Committee to a general meeting under Article 24, and the rights and duties related to the duties performed by the Promotion Committee shall be comprehensively taken over by the Cooperative,” and Paragraph (5) of the same Article provides that “The Promotion Committee shall hand over the accounting book and related documents in which the

On the other hand, Article 14 (1) of the former Urban Improvement Act provides for the selection of a management entity specialized in improvement projects as the duties of the promotion committee.

In light of the contents, form, and purport of the relevant laws and regulations, there is no resolution at a general meeting of members to the effect that the Defendant approves or ratified the instant service contract for the reasons indicated in its reasoning.

Even if there is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or misapprehending the legal principles on the former Act, etc., contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, it is justifiable to conclude that the committee comprehensively succeeds to the rights and obligations under the instant service contract by the committee of promoters under Article 15

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.