동대표해임결의무효확인 등
1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for confirmation of invalidity of the resolution to dismiss the same representative shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.
Basic Facts
The defendant is an autonomous management organization organized by the occupants to manage the Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government B Apartment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment”) and consists of 33 representatives from each Dong of the instant apartment.
The Plaintiff was the representative of each Dong in the 39th apartment district in the instant case.
Around December 2012, the Defendant filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the ground that “Around December 2012, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant received the Plaintiff as a crime of taking property in breach of trust on the ground that “The Plaintiff received an illegal solicitation from D that C will be selected as a security service company for the instant apartment, and received KRW 50 million over twice.”
On December 12, 2013, the Defendant held a meeting on December 12, 2013 to present the “Written Demand for dismissal of the representative of each Dong in the third 39 constituency” to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant passed a resolution to pass the above agenda with the 18 votes, 5 votes, and 1 vote (hereinafter “instant resolution”) and requested the election commission to proceed with the procedure for dismissal.
From January 8, 2014 to September of the same month, the election commission of the instant apartment, upon the said request, proceeded with the Plaintiff’s “39 election for the dismissal of representatives from each Dong’s 39 constituency.” As a result, 101 of the total 140 persons, which was the affirmative votes, 97 marks, 4 marks, and 39 marks, were passed to dismiss the applicant.
[Based on the facts that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 5-3, Eul evidence No. 6-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings of the defendant as to the main defense of the defendant, the defendant's assertion by the parties to the judgment as to the main defense of the safety of the defendant, regardless of the validity of the resolution of this case, has already lost the plaintiff's status as an occupant, and the plaintiff is entitled to become a member of the election management regardless of the validity of the resolution of this case as at the time of resignation ( March 31, 2014).