beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.07.31 2013나42511

조합총회결의무효확인

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part arising between the plaintiffs and the defendant is the defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a redevelopment and consolidation project association (hereinafter “Defendant partnership”) which completed the establishment registration on July 28, 2009 after obtaining authorization on July 28, 2009 pursuant to the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”), and whose project implementation district covers 78,920 square meters in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as a project implementation district, and its members are 827 members, and the Plaintiffs are the members of the Defendant partnership.

B. On March 18, 2010, the Defendant Cooperative announced a bid for the selection of a contractor. On March 26, 2010, the 14 construction companies, including NAS Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “NS Construction”) and Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “NS Construction”) participated in the bidding. After the bidding, only NAS Construction and Hyundai Construction participated in the bidding.

C. After that, on April 27, 2010, the board of representatives of the Defendant’s association presented to the general meeting for the selection of a contractor for SS Construction and Hyundai Construction who participated in the tender. After that, on May 8, 2010 and May 15, 2010, at the general meeting of the Defendant’s association held on May 15, 2010, Hyundai Construction was selected as the contractor with 331 votes (in writing, 67 votes, on-site voting 264 votes) and 402 votes (in writing, 200 votes, on-site voting 202 votes) obtained on May 8, 2010.

(hereinafter “the instant decision to select the contractor”). D.

The written voting for the above resolution was made in a way that the seal imprint is sealed and sealed in the envelope, and the seal imprint is affixed on the sealed ledger and submitted.

E. After that, on April 2, 2012 following the resolution of the board of directors of the Defendant Union prepared a contract agreement after consultation with the NA Construction, and on May 3, 2012, the Defendant Union’s resolution was made by the board of representatives of the Defendant Union, and on May 26, 2012, with 431 votes (in writing voting 399, on-site voting 65), 32 votes (in writing voting 6, on-site voting 25), and 431 votes (in writing voting 6, on-site voting 25), at the ordinary meeting of the Defendant Union in 2012.