A. The Plaintiff is an organization established pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the Act”) for the purpose of implementing the project on the management of the building site and its appurtenant facilities in Namyang-si, Namyang-si (hereinafter “the instant commercial building”).

B. The Defendant is a sectional owner of 210 and 211 among the instant commercial buildings.

The area of a section for exclusive use is 144.41 square meters in the case of 210, and 158.12 square meters in the case of 211.

The aggregate of the area of the instant commercial building is 11,745.65 square meters. Among them, the ratio of 210 square meters occupied by 1.23% (i.e., 14.41 square meters ± 11,745.65 square meters ± 100 square meters x 100, and 100 square meters on the third place in a minority place; hereinafter the same shall apply). The ratio occupied by 211 is 1.35% (i.e. 158.12 square meters ± 11,745.65 square meters x 100).

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1, 4, 12 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the whole purport of pleading

2. As to the defendant's main defense

A. The gist of the defense is that there is no legitimate authority to represent the plaintiff, and the lawsuit of this case filed by C as the representative of the plaintiff is unlawful as it was filed by a non-representative.

B. In addition to the purport of the entire argument in Gap evidence No. 10, it is reasonable to view that Eul has a legitimate authority to represent the plaintiff, with the consent of 29 co-owners of the commercial building of this case on September 16, 2015, see Supreme Court Order 2015Kahap164, Sept. 16, 2015, when holding the management body meeting on November 25, 2012 with the purpose of the meeting, the manager and the election of auditors, etc. as the objective of the meeting, which is to hold on November 25, 2012.

The defendant's defense of this case is the same.