2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

2. We examine the determination on the claim for confirmation of invalidity of the first resolution of this case, and the selection of work executor is not a matter belonging to the scope of authority of the promotion committee or the residents' general meeting held by the promotion committee (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da6298, Jun. 12, 2008). Thus, the first resolution of this case, which ratified the construction contract of GS construction with the GS Construction at its inaugural general meeting on August 18, 2006, which was held by the promotion committee, is null and void.

However, in the event that a resolution of ratification of the above previous resolution was made at a general meeting held later than the first general meeting of redevelopment cooperatives as it is, even if the previous resolution is null and void, barring special circumstances such as the absence or invalidity is recognized due to defects in the new general meeting resolution or the revocation thereof, seeking confirmation of invalidity of the previous general meeting resolution does not meet the requirements for protection of rights (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da64479, Sept. 26, 2003). Accordingly, the health unit of this case and the defendant held an extraordinary general meeting on June 8, 201 after the second general meeting was issued with the second general approval. The second resolution of this case, which was made after the second approval of modification, can be deemed ratified as the first resolution in light of its contents, and the second resolution of this case, which was made after the second approval of modification, cannot be deemed as ratified as the second resolution of this case, and there are no special circumstances to recognize that the second resolution of this case was null and void or void due to defects.