2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

A. The Plaintiff is a person who manages the Do shop and office of the second, third and upper floor studio in the Dong-gu, Gwangju, and the third floor studio E, and the Defendant is a person who resides in the above third floor studio E, and the Defendant is a representative of the F Merchants Association (hereinafter “Merchants Association”).

(b) D shop is an aggregate building, and there is a main source blocking facility on the rooftop.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, 5, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. In order to take the measures of cutting off at the main source blocking facility of the Plaintiff’s alleged D shop, a resolution by sectional owners is required. The merchants’ association, without these procedures, has resolved to take the measures of cutting off the studio and office managed by the Plaintiff on the ground of fire risk of electric facilities.

However, the plaintiff is under the condition that the fire risk is removed by reconstruction of the squad in accordance with the inspection matters of the Korea Electrical Safety Corporation.

Therefore, the above resolution is unlawful because it does not go through legitimate procedures, and there is no need to take the measures, so the defendant shall not take the above measures, and when it is violated, the plaintiff shall be liable to pay damages of KRW 300,000 per day of violation to the plaintiff.

B. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the person who implements the above short circuit measure is the merchant’s association. The Plaintiff brought the instant lawsuit against the Defendant, the representative of the merchant’s association. Since the merchant’s association and the Defendant, the representative, have a separate legal personality, they cannot be deemed to naturally affect the rights and obligations of the merchant’s association. Thus, the instant claim is without merit by itself.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.