1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The F building of the window of Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant building”) is an aggregate building of the 11th floor above ground and the 4th floor above ground.

B. Each of the sectional owners of the instant building (Plaintiffs A G, B H, Plaintiff CI’s 1/2 shares, Plaintiff D J)

C. Defendant E is the spouse of L, who is the co-owner of the share of 1/2 among the K units of the instant building, and was appointed as the president of the Defendant F Service Association (hereinafter “Defendant F Service Association”) on April 10, 2018 at the general meeting of shareholders from April 10, 2018.

[Grounds for Recognition of Facts] Uncontentious facts, Gap evidence 10-1 to 5, Eul evidence 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a management body established based on Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”); on April 10, 2018, Defendant E, who is not a sectional owner of the instant building, was subject to a resolution to appoint Defendant E, who is not a sectional owner of the instant building, as the president of the Defendant Association (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

However, Article 10 of the Articles of Incorporation of the Defendant prosperity provides that the president’s qualification as “the representative of the occupancy room in which the seller directly operates the business,” and limits the qualification as the manager to the sectional owners of the building of this case. Therefore, the resolution of this case is in violation of the restriction, and at least 1/2 of the participants in the resolution of this case did not meet the qualification requirements for membership of the Defendant prosperity,

Therefore, the resolution of this case is in violation of the law or the articles of association of the defendant prosperity. Thus, based on Article 42-2 of the Aggregate Buildings Act, the cancellation of the resolution of this case is sought.

3. A lawsuit for dismissal of an administrator under Article 24(3) of the Aggregate Buildings Act, which is a lawsuit for determination on a lawsuit against Defendant E, is essential to make all the managing body and the administrator who are the party to the lawsuit, a joint defendant.