A. misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) After the deadline for submitting the Defendant A’s written statement of reasons for appeal expires, the contents written in the written opinion submitted by the Defendant’s private defense counsel are examined to the extent that the reasons for appeal are supplemented.

On July 25, 2013, one of the seven representatives of E apartment units elected on July 25, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “instant apartment units”) was excluded from the scope of the same representative. On January 2014, 2014, two members were dismissed from office, and at the time of the instant case, the two representatives were the Defendants and G four persons. However, in order to prevent the corruption as the chairperson of the tenant meeting, three Defendants, who were the same representatives, were gathered, decided to dismiss G from office or from office as the chairperson, and that C was elected as the chairperson.

Since the decision of the Ministry of Government Legislation with the consent of three representatives of four representatives effective at the time is made, the above decision of appointment of the chairperson is legitimate even if the defendants submitted the above decision of appointment to the tax office, and since the defendants stated C in the business registration certificate at the tax office as a joint representative, the document of this case was prepared with the knowledge that it was recognized as a legitimate chairperson. Thus, the defendant did not have the awareness of intention and illegality, and the document of this case was prepared to prevent the departure of G solely for the benefit of all residents, so the illegality is dismissed.

2) Defendant B and C caused the vacancy of the same representative at the time of the instant case, with the consent of three representatives with the majority of the two representatives, both Defendants and G gather and four, and the majority of the full number of representatives is required for the election of the president of the representatives of occupants under the apartment management agreement of the instant apartment management agreement, and as such, it is not clear whether the majority of the full number of representatives is required for the election of the president of the representatives of occupants under the apartment management agreement of the instant apartment management agreement, the said

must be viewed.

The Defendants are apartment buildings of this case in order to see Ging with low interest.