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

2. The instant lawsuit on the instant defense is unlawful, since the Plaintiff, a non-corporate body, as a non-corporate body of the lawsuit on the property jointly owned, intends to proceed with the lawsuit under its name. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant without a resolution of the general meeting of employees. Therefore, the said lawsuit is unlawful.

The lawsuit concerning collective property can only be instituted in the form of an indispensable co-litigation under the name of an association which is not a juristic person after the resolution of a general meeting of members, or the whole members thereof become the parties, and even if the members of the association were the representative of the association or the members of the general meeting of members, they were the representative of the association.

Even if a lawsuit is filed as an act of preserving collective property, such legal doctrine is not a party to the lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2004Da44971, Sept. 15, 2005). In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the statement No. 14, the Plaintiff was an organization established to promote friendship and friendship among residents in Criri-ri community, and the Plaintiff did not hold a general meeting of members separately related thereto when filing the lawsuit against the Defendant on February 27, 2018. The Plaintiff submitted the minutes of the general meeting for ratification on June 28, 2018, which is the day before the closing of the argument, but it is recognized that there is no proof as to whether the general meeting was lawful due to the convening procedure. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, even if it was a non-corporate, has filed the lawsuit in its name without a resolution of the general meeting, and thus, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful.

3. If so, the conclusion of this case.