1. Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for nullification of the resolution to appoint an administrator is dismissed.

2. The defendant dated November 26, 2010.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are the parties 1) A Commercial Building, an aggregate building located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, (hereinafter "the commercial building of this case").

) The co-owner and the defendant (hereinafter “Defendant management body”) are co-owners.

Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the " Aggregate Buildings Act")

(2) Under Article 23, the Defendant’s Intervenor was appointed as a manager at the management body meeting of each Defendant’s management body on December 12, 2008, September 22, 2009, and October 26, 2010.

B. Since December 12, 2008 and September 22, 2009, D et al. managed the commercial building of this case from around 2002. However, around December 12, 2008, the Defendant’s Intervenor held the management body meeting with the delegation from some of the sectional owners of the commercial building of this case, and was appointed as the manager at the management body meeting of this case (hereinafter “resolution for the appointment of the manager at December 12, 2008”).

(2) On February 20, 2009, the Defendant brought a lawsuit against D and E under the name of the Defendant management body against himself as the representative, and against D and E, the Seoul Central District Court 2009Gahap18842. The above court dismissed the said lawsuit on July 9, 2009 on the ground that “the resolution of appointing the Defendant as the manager of the Defendant management body on December 12, 2008 that the Defendant appointed the Defendant as the manager of the Defendant management body was invalid because it did not meet the requirement of resolution under the Aggregate Buildings Act, and thus, the Defendant’s Intervenor was not entitled to represent the Defendant management body (hereinafter “instant judgment 1”). Accordingly, the Defendant’s Intervenor appealed appealed in the name of the Defendant management body.

3. On the other hand, the defendant joining the defendant was sentenced to the first judgment of this case, and re-appellant on September 22, 2009.