1. The Defendants are 31,308,670 won to each Plaintiff and 5% per annum from December 12, 2018 to June 13, 2019.

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant B is a person who served as the Plaintiff’s president from August 2015 to September 30, 2017, and Defendant C is a person who served as the managing director of A apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from November 1, 2014 to December 6, 2016.

B. Around May 15, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works for the construction works of the instant apartment frame with E, a stock company, with D having been in office as the president. As such, the Plaintiff expressed his opinion against the occupants of the instant apartment complex about whether they should be borne by each household unit or bear them as long-term repair appropriations. However, Defendant B took office as the president of the Plaintiff on August 15, 2015. Around February 15, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendants the notice to the effect that “F, a stock company for the management of the instant apartment, is to replace and repair major facilities for common use of the apartment complex pursuant to Article 47(1) of the Housing Act, and to use the long-term repair appropriations for any purpose other than the management body under this Act pursuant to Article 43-4(2) and Article 43-4(2) of the Housing Act.”

3) Nevertheless, from February 26, 2016 to May 2016, the Defendants paid KRW 104,362,234 of each household’s creative mold coworking cost with the money held by E as long-term repair appropriations from February 26, 2016 to May 2016. 4) After that, G was appointed as the Plaintiff’s president and filed a civil petition against Busan Jin-gu regarding the payment of the above construction cost. Busan Jin-gu executed the construction cost of each household coworking work for each household unit falling under the section for exclusive use as long-term repair appropriations without adjusting the long-term repair plan.