1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s principal lawsuit against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and Defendant D.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed as the same.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a management body established with all sectional owners as members pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “the Act”) with respect to a building A located in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu E (hereinafter “the instant building”).

B. On May 28, 2014, the occupants of the instant building selected and appointed F and F as the president at the meeting of the conference held on May 28, 2014, and decided to select the representative and the officer of the management body of the instant building within a prompt time and time, and decided to notify the president and the general secretary of the management body of the time and place of the meeting.

C. On June 4, 2014, an extraordinary management body meeting consisting of “the head of the management body of the instant building and the election of executive officers” (hereinafter “instant management body meeting”) was held, and a resolution was passed to appoint F as a new manager with the consent of all the participants at the said management body meeting (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

The meeting minutes of the management body of this case include “Jho K cafeteria L, M Nx, O, P Qk R, Sho T retail U, V W cafeteria X, YA, AB AC AD, AE AF AF store, AH AI I, AH AI AI I, AJ AKFF, and AL AM storeN.”

Meanwhile, while G Co., Ltd., which had been a management company of the instant building, filed an application for provisional injunction against obstruction of business with the Busan District Court Branch Decision 2015Kahap87, stating that “C is a legitimate manager at the management body meeting held on February 13, 2015, by appointing him/her as a legitimate manager, and thereby the former manager F loses its status as a manager of the instant building, and thereby obstructing the management of the applicant, the management company, by exercising the manager’s authority, even though he/she lost its status as a manager of the instant building,” the above application for provisional injunction against obstruction of business was dismissed on the ground that the resolution of December 14, 2014, which was appointed as the manager C, was invalid.