1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by B;

We examine whether the representative of the plaintiff who filed the lawsuit of this case as the representative ex officio.

Article 38(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Act”) provides that “The intention of a management body meeting shall be decided by the majority of sectional owners and the voting rights, unless otherwise provided for in this Act or by regulations.” In the calculation of the number of sectional owners, if one person owns several sectional buildings within such aggregate building, it shall be deemed one sectional owner (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2016Da26860, Sept. 23, 2016; 2009Da6546, Oct. 13, 201); and Article 37(2) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings provides that “If a number of sectional owners share the exclusive ownership, co-owners shall designate one person who shall exercise voting rights at the management body meeting, even if a number of sectional owners share the exclusive ownership.”

If evidence Nos. 1-1 and 3 of the evidence Nos. 1-3 added the purport of the whole pleadings, the sectional owners owned 20 sections of the building in Sungwon-si A (hereinafter “instant building”) as shown below, but as C, D, and B own two sections of the building, the total number of 17 members (as E and F share 1/2 of the building in this case, although E and F share 1/2 of the shares, if they share the section of exclusive ownership as seen earlier, one of them exercises one voting right, and thus 101 of the sectional owners of the building in this case is deemed one). Of the sectional owners of the instant building in this case, the fact that Ga, H, C, I, K, D, and B held a management body meeting on January 21, 2017 and resolved to appoint B as the chairperson of the Plaintiff, and that the above sectional owners of the building in this case, who are the sectional owners of the building in this case, and the telephone in this case, directly agreed with the above resolution.

the owner of the No. 5.