2. Defendant E-management body on July 2016

A. The plaintiffs are sectional owners of E, an aggregate building in Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H (hereinafter “instant aggregate building”).

Defendant E management body (hereinafter “Defendant E management body”) is a management body established by consisting of sectional owners of the instant aggregate building pursuant to the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”). Defendant F is a person elected at the management body meeting of the management body of the Defendant E on July 26, 2016, and Defendant G (hereinafter “Defendant G”) is a company entrusted with the management of the instant aggregate building, as follows:

B. On July 22, 2014, Defendant management body resolution, etc. (1) held a management body meeting on July 22, 2014 and elected I as a manager. (2) The J, a sectional owner of the instant aggregate building, filed an application for a provisional disposition to suspend the performance of duties and to appoint an acting director against I with the Seoul Southern District Court (the above court 2015Kahap7) by asserting that the resolution of the management body meeting was null and void on July 22, 2014. On June 23, 2015, the above court suspended I’s execution of duties until the final and conclusive judgment on the merits of the instant claim for confirmation of invalidity of the resolution on July 22, 2014, and decided to the effect that K as an acting manager was appointed for that period.

3) J and the instant sectional owner L filed a lawsuit against the Defendant management body against the Seoul Southern District Court seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the management body meeting (the aforementioned court 2015Gahap4987) on July 22, 2014. The said court decided to recommend reconciliation that the resolution of the management body meeting was invalid on November 11, 2015, and that the resolution of the management body meeting on July 22, 2014 was not asserted by the J, L and Defendant management body. Accordingly, the said decision became final and conclusive around that time according to the fact that the resolution of the management body meeting was not raised by the J, L and Defendant management body.