1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. B commercial buildings consisting of one aggregate building (one story 873.04 square meters, two stories 702.75 square meters, hereinafter “instant aggregate building”) and 1 other general buildings composed of 15 lots of land and 14 partitioned buildings on the ground, Jung-gu, Seoul and 49.3 square meters.

However, in the register on nine sections in the aggregate building of this case, only the section for exclusive use is marked with the structure and the size of each floor without the specification of the room, etc., and in the register on the remaining five sections for exclusive use, the section for exclusive use is written in accordance with subparagraphs 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14;

Even after remodeling construction implemented from May 2005, the previous register has been used as it is, and the status of the building has not been properly shown.

B. Since May 29, 195, C lost its ownership by sale by voluntary auction on March 30, 2012.

1) The share of a sectioned building of this case is the 1st floor, 2nd floor (1st floor 254.01 square meters, 204.25 square meters, 204.25 square meters, and hereinafter “the instant sectioned building”).

(2) Of the 7,363.53/32, 994.72 Shares 2) Shares in a site ① Shares in 9/18 square meters in Namdong-dong, Jungdong-gu, Seoul. 63.1 square meters, ② Shares in 207/1,276.2 shares in each of the F 56.5 square meters and G 117.7 square meters, respectively.

C. Meanwhile, the Defendant is an organization composed of building and site owners of B commercial buildings (hereinafter “instant props”), and it has collected rent for each shop from the lessees of each shop in commercial buildings every month on behalf of the instant props and distributed it to the instant props.

Among the props in this case, at least 10 square meters owners of each of the respective shares in buildings and sites were ex officio directors of the defendant, and C also was in the status of director of the defendant.

[Based on recognition] The written evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 7 of Eul, the testimony of H of the party-trial witness, and the purport of the whole pleadings.