1. It is confirmed that Defendant E is not in the position of administrator of Defendant D Management Body.

2. The plaintiffs defendant E.

1. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

A. On November 20, 201, Defendant E was appointed and served as the manager of the building of 13rd above the 6th above ground ground of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant building”) which is an aggregate building on November 20, 201, and the term of office expired on November 20, 2013. The resolution of appointment of Defendant E as of November 20, 201 was null and void since it was made at an unlawful general meeting due to the failure to give notice to the sectional owners of the above aggregate building to convene the convocation, and thus, Plaintiff E was appointed as a new manager at the Defendant’s management body meeting on November 24, 201, and ③ as above, Defendant E was not entitled to continue to perform the duties of the manager of the said building, and thus, Defendant E did not have the current status of the manager of the said building.

B. Preliminary claim, Defendant E, while serving as the manager of the instant building on November 20, 2013, did not hold a management body meeting for the election of the new manager, due to an unfaithful business process, even if the management body meeting was to be held, and did not receive and use the management fee of the said building in an inappropriate manner, avoided the audit of the auditor of the Defendant management body, and received an unreasonable benefit as the manager, and accordingly, Defendant E seeks to dismiss the Defendants pursuant to Article 24(5) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Aggregate Buildings Act”).

2. Determination as to the primary claim against the defendant management body

A. Although there is no dispute between the parties regarding the assertion that the convening procedure of the Defendant’s management body meeting held on November 20, 201, by which Defendant E appointed Defendant E as the manager, is unlawful, the fact that Defendant E was appointed as the manager at the Defendant’s management body meeting held on November 20, 201 does not exist between the parties, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the notice of convening the management body meeting was unlawful.