2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. E An urban environment rearrangement project association (hereinafter “instant association”) is an urban environment rearrangement project association that has obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of Yongsan-gu Office around October 18, 2012, wherein the daily area of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F 41,744 square meters is the project implementation district.

B. On August 6, 2013, the instant association announced that the president of the association and the association will hold an extraordinary general meeting to dismiss the association’s president and the association’s director under the name of G representative who proposed the special general meeting dismissed by the association’s president and the association’s president with at least 1/10 of the association members’ proposal, and made a resolution to dismiss H and I from the association president at the extraordinary general meeting held on August 22, 2013 (hereinafter “the extraordinary general meeting held on August 22, 2013”), [H and I won the lawsuit to nullify the resolution of the said general meeting (Seoul Western District Court 2013Gahap8618), and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time). Defendant B and D did not hold the said extraordinary general meeting as a quorum other than the above GJ, K and Defendant B, Defendant B and C. D, Defendant B and D did not reach the quorum of 251-14, 2015, but did not hold the said extraordinary general meeting.

At the time, Defendant B and D are the joint representatives among the proposers of the special meeting, and Defendant C was the representative of the second proposer.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On August 22, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a service contract with Defendant B and C to perform services to hold the said extraordinary general meeting, including planning of the extraordinary general meeting, demands for written resolution, computer and telephone promotion, etc. on August 22, 2013, and at the time, the said Defendants agreed to pay the service cost.

(2) Upon receipt of the orders from Defendant B and C, the Plaintiff performed basic work from July 1, 2013 to August 22, 2013 for 53 days, and on August 8, 2013.