1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. Appeal;

Basic Facts

The Plaintiff entered into the instant management contract and the instant building management business as a corporation established for the purpose of building management. On June 2, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into an aggregate building D Condominium (64 households, officetels 156 households, hereinafter “instant building”) with the council of occupants’ representatives, which is entrusted to perform the instant building management business (hereinafter “instant management contract”) and has performed the instant building management business.

The instant management contract was automatically renewed twice until June 14, 2013.

The council of occupants' representatives of the instant building held a regular meeting of the management body on May 27, 201 and appointed O as the manager and the Defendant A as the auditor, respectively.

Defendant A asserted that there was a defect in the meeting of the management body on May 27, 2011, and applied for a suspension of the performance of duties againstO and a provisional disposition of the appointment of an acting director, and received the decision of acceptance on January 3, 2012.

(Seoul Southern District Court 201Kahap588).O resigned on June 18, 2012 after the decision of provisional disposition was approved.

On December 15, 2012, P, a sectional owner of the instant building, and Defendant A’s wife, held a temporary management body meeting of the instant building, and a resolution was adopted to select Defendant A as a manager at the said meeting (hereinafter “instant appointment resolution”).

On January 13, 2013, the O applied for a provisional disposition to suspend the performance of duties with respect to Defendant A and received the decision of acceptance on May 21, 2013, and Q Q was appointed as an acting representative.

(Seoul Southern District Court 2013Kahap8, hereinafter “the instant provisional disposition”). Meanwhile, on June 11, 2013, O filed a lawsuit against the instant building management body against the Defendant seeking confirmation of invalidity of the instant appointment resolution (Seoul Southern District Court 2013Kahap1049), and on November 14, 2013, the judgment confirming that the instant appointment resolution is null and void.