1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 7, 2013, the Plaintiff is a person elected as the representative of each building at the third apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) at the council of occupants’ representatives at the same time. The Defendant is an autonomous organization composed of representatives by buildings of the instant apartment.

B. Article 20 of the Management Rules of the instant apartment 1) provides that “When the representative of each Dong falls under the grounds for dismissal under paragraph (1), he/she may request the election commission to proceed with the procedure of dismissal by making a resolution with the consent of at least 1/10 of occupants, etc. in the relevant constituency or with the consent of the majority of its members at the council of occupants’ representatives, and the election commission in receipt of a request to proceed with the procedure of dismissal shall proceed with the procedure of dismissal (Paragraph (2) and the dismissal under Paragraph (2) provides that “the majority of occupants, etc. in the relevant constituency shall vote and make a decision with the consent of the majority of the voters, but the dismissed representative of each Dong shall also lose his/her status as an executive (Paragraph (3)).” 2) The instant apartment election commission published a non-Confidence statement on July 22, 2014 on the ground that the petition of the resident was filed pursuant to Article 20(2) of the Management Rules, and conducted a non-Confidence voting for the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “instant voting”).

3) As a result of the instant voting, the said Election Commission publicly announced that the Plaintiff lost its representative status as of July 26, 2014, following the voting by 32 households among 56 households, as the voting of the instant 56 households passed with an affirmative vote of 30, opposing 1, and invalid 1 vote. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap’s 1, 2, and 9 through 12, and the purport of the entire pleadings, respectively.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The instant apartment election commission, which claimed by the Plaintiff, only manages the overall election procedure managed by the Defendant, and presented or passed a resolution on the dismissal of the said representative, but neglected the legitimate procedure, and decided to dismiss the Plaintiff.