부담금지급
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of dismissal and dismissal as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The following shall be added to the fourth instance judgment of the first instance court in the front of the "based ground for recognition" in the 5th instance.
G. On the other hand, the defendant et al. requested confirmation of invalidity of the second management and disposal plan and filed a lawsuit claiming revocation in the preliminary case with the Seoul Administrative Court, on the grounds that "the second management and disposal plan contains defects unfairly transferred to the members of a commercial building" and "the second management and disposal plan contains defects."
However, the above court dismissed all of the above claims by the defendant et al. (Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap7295 decided October 18, 2012), and the defendant et al. appealed and appealed, but all of the appeals were dismissed.
(Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu34664 decided June 26, 2013 and Supreme Court Decision 2013Du14320 Decided November 15, 2013). I
In addition, F, a member of the Plaintiff, filed a lawsuit with the Seoul Administrative Court to seek confirmation of invalidity of the public notice prior to February 27, 2014 by the Plaintiff, on the grounds that “the Plaintiff, through a resolution of the board of directors at around 2011, selects the central appraisal corporation and sight appraisal corporation as an appraiser of a commercial building and concluded a contract for a commercial building.”
However, the above court rejected the claim for nullification of the second management and disposition plan and the above management and disposition plan for the reason that “the plaintiff has no legal interest in dispute over the above management and disposition plan beyond the transfer announcement,” and even if there is an error in the process of selecting the appraisal business operator, the appraisal results made by the appraisal business operator are consistent with the criteria of the management and disposition plan concerning the appraisal of assets.