1. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1.The following facts of recognition may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including various numbers), together with the purport of the whole pleadings:

The defendant is a management body under Article 23 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "Building Act"), which consists of all sectional owners of Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office Btel buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "officetel of this case"). The plaintiff is a sectional owner of the officetel of this case.

B. D was elected as a manager at the management body meeting of the Defendant on May 31, 2014, and its term of office was terminated on June 15, 2016.

On July 9, 2016, a resolution was made to re-election D as a manager at a temporary meeting of the management body held by the Defendant.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, etc. seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the resolution by the above temporary management body meeting as the court No. 2016, 54931, and lost.

C. The Defendant convened an extraordinary general meeting for the appointment of a custodian on two occasions on July 7, 2018 and December 1, 2018, as the custodian D’s two-year term of office ends on July 2018, but the Defendant failed to meet the quorum and failed to appoint a custodian.

The Plaintiff filed a motion against the Defendant for requesting the appointment of an extraordinary meeting for the appointment of a custodian on July 7, 2018, by asserting that: (a) the Defendant was not the Defendant’s administrator who was not legally appointed by D as this Court No. 2018B, 30153; and (b) the Plaintiff’s appeal and reappeal were all dismissed on the ground that D would be legally able to perform the duties of a custodian until the Defendant’s new custodian was appointed (2018B, 30153); (c) the Plaintiff’s appeal and reappeal were dismissed.

(Seoul High Court Order 2018Ra21342 dated January 10, 2019 and Supreme Court Order 2019Ma5128 dated May 17, 2019). 2. The defendant's attorney has the power of attorney.