1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a resident of the Seosung-si B apartment (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”). The Defendant is an organization composed of itself according to the relevant provisions of the Housing Act and the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act and the management rules of the apartment of this case in order to elect the president, auditor, and representative of the instant apartment of this case.

B. On February 17, 2012, the Defendant announced the Plaintiff as a candidate for a special election for the representative of the instant apartment building D in order to organize the first council of occupants' representatives, and on February 22, 2012, the Plaintiff announced the election of the representative of the instant apartment building as the representative of the instant apartment building.

C. On March 15, 2013, the Seosung-si notified the Plaintiff of the disposition of deprivation of qualification that “as at the time of departure, he did not reside in the relevant complex for at least six months after the completion of resident registration, he/she shall not be qualified as the representative of each building.”

The plaintiff was elected as the representative for each Dong of the second council of occupants' representatives and completed his/her term of office, and again elected as the representative for each Dong of the council of occupants' representatives on March 20, 2015, and on April 16, 2015, the plaintiff was elected as the representative for each Dong of occupants' representatives.

【Fact-finding without a dispute over the ground for recognition】 Facts-finding, Gap evidence 1 through 3, evidence 4-1, 2, 5, evidence 6-1 and 6-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Article 18 of the Management Rules of the instant apartment complex asserted by the Plaintiff provides that “The term of office of the representative of each Dong under Article 50(8) of the Enforcement Decree of the Housing Act shall be from May 1 to April 30 of the following year (two years) and may be renewed only once.”

However, the resolution of February 22, 2012, which elected the plaintiff as the representative of the first building on March 15, 2013 due to the disposition of deprivation of qualification by the third building on March 15, 2013, is null and void as it is null and void. However, the resolution of the plaintiff elected as the representative of the third building by the third building does not violate the provisions on the restriction of

Therefore, the resolution of election of the representative of the first building is null and void for the defendant.