2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The Plaintiffs are co-owners of Etel and commercial buildings under the J of Mapo-si, Mapo-si (hereinafter “instant building”), and the Defendant is an organization consisting of sectional owners of the instant building established for the purpose of managing the instant building pursuant to the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings.

B. On September 25, 2016, the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting, and with the consent of all the members present at the above general meeting, the F, Vice-President G, General H, and Auditor of the Defendant’s Representative Meeting were elected, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant election resolution,” and the officers of the elected representative meeting shall be referred to as the “executive officers of this case”).

On October 20, 2018, the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting and resolved to have the instant executive officers reappointed on the condition that the majority of the sectional owners of the instant building present [244 households among the total number of 338 households (i.e., 235 households present at 235 households)] [24,87.425 square meters of the total voting rights (i.e., 24,743.5 square meters of the voting rights (=24,887.425 square meters of the voting rights agreed upon 34,743.5 square meters of the total voting rights)].

(hereinafter “instant Reappointment resolution”). D.

According to Articles 22(2) and 23(3) of the Building Management Rules, the term of office of the defendant representative council shall be two years, and may be renewed only once.

In addition, the officers of the defendant representative meeting shall be elected with the majority of sectional owners' attendance (including the delegation letter) and the majority voting rights (Article 22(3) of the above Regulations), and each sectional owner shall have the voting rights according to his/her share ratio (Article 10(1) of the above Regulations). / [Grounds for recognition] Nos. 1, 4, 23, and 24 of the above Regulations, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. Although the plaintiffs sought confirmation of the absence of the instant election resolution, which first elected the officers of the instant case, the key points of the instant safety defense were the executives of the instant case.