1. Of the judgment of the first instance, K at the management body meeting (general meeting) held by the Defendant on September 14, 2017 as the president, and V and X as the auditors, respectively.

Facts of recognition

The reasoning for this Court's explanation is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and such reasoning is cited as it includes summary words under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The main point of the plaintiffs' assertion is as follows.

The resolution in this case is null and void because the degree of defects is significant and obvious, and even if it is not null and void, it falls under the grounds for revocation.

The Plaintiffs, primarily against Defendant J management body, seek confirmation of invalidity of the instant resolution and revocation of the instant resolution in advance.

(1) On August 1, 2017, the Defendant’s steering committee convened a general meeting by an illegal person with the authority to convene a general meeting was expelled from the Defendant’s administrator, but the management rules, which served as the basis thereof, are null and void as there is no less than 3/4 of sectional owners of an aggregate building and no less than 3/4 of voting rights.

Therefore, at the time of the resolution of this case, the convening authority of the management body meeting (general meeting) of the defendant J management body was the plaintiff A.

The resolution of this case is unlawful since it was convened without authority.

The Defendant’s management rules are valid and the expulsion against Plaintiff A is valid.

However, Article 33 of the Aggregate Buildings Act provides that if there is no administrator, at least 1/5 of the sectional owners may convene a meeting of the management body. Thus, the resolution of this case is not a resolution by a legitimate convening authority.

(2) The convocation of a meeting of the sectional owners shall be notified to the sectional owners by specifying the purpose of the meeting one week, but the meeting has not gone through such procedure.

③ The resolution of this case below the quorum is the resolution below the quorum.

After the defendant's resolution on the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case, at least 1/5 of the sectional owners of the building in this case (at least 736 all sectional owners) convened a management body meeting pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the Aggregate Buildings Act, and on December 28, 2018.