1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are E indicated as the representative of the plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a reconstruction maintenance and improvement project association established on June 27, 2006 under the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (hereinafter “Urban Improvement Act”) for the purpose of rebuilding projects related to housing A on the ground of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant project”).

Defendant C was the president of the Plaintiff’s association, and Defendant D was in charge of the operation of the association as a general manager.

B. On August 17, 2006, the Plaintiff contracted the construction for the instant project to Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”).

The contents of the instant project were the construction of a main complex building with both housing and neighborhood living facilities.

During the process of the instant project, the Plaintiff changed the design to partially reduce the number of parking spaces, and obtained approval for use on June 2, 2008 for new buildings.

C. After the completion of the affairs such as general sale and occupancy of new apartment and commercial building, the Plaintiff’s executive officers voluntarily reduced the number of parking spaces and use the parking lot for apartment residents together with the shop occupants to cause damage to the members and apartment residents.

The Plaintiff’s auditor asserts that, on behalf of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff sustained damages of KRW 235,152,00 on behalf of the president of the partnership, by failing to undergo a resolution of a general meeting of partners in the process of modifying the number of parking spaces, including Defendant C, directors G, and H, the Plaintiff incurred damages of KRW 235,152,00, on behalf of the president of the partnership, and received a final and conclusive judgment in which

(Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2014Gahap1444 decided Feb. 13, 2015, Seoul High Court Decision 2015Na10617 decided Dec. 22, 2015, Supreme Court Decision 2016Da7210 Decided May 27, 2016). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 1 (including each number of branches; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.