2016da 137181 Registration of transfer of ownership

The District Housing Association of Bara

B

July 14, 2017

August 25, 2017

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The defendant shall implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the plaintiff for sale on the date of delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case, and deliver the real estate listed in the

1. The plaintiff's ground of claim

The plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiff Association") is established for the purpose of implementing a reconstruction project of Songpa-gu and multi-household houses on the ground of Songpa-gu C and D (hereinafter referred to as "A loan"), and is approved by the head of Songpa-gu on April 6, 2016 to establish a regional housing association.

A. The Defendant is the owner of the loan No. 2, 1, 2, and 3 of the attached list (hereinafter referred to as “the loan of this case”).

Of the members of the Plaintiff Union 26 households, 25 households and 9 non-members of the Plaintiff Union, excluding the Defendant, have passed a resolution on re-building AB and completed the decision on the said and housing units, and the Plaintiff Union has the right to file a claim with the Defendant for sale of the loan of this case pursuant to Article 18-2 of the Housing Act and Article 48 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the

The plaintiff demanded the defendant to sell the loan of this case through the service of the duplicate of the complaint of this case. Thus, the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for the transfer of ownership of the loan of this case and deliver the loan of this case to the plaintiff.

2. Determination as to the defendant's defense prior to the merits

A. Defenses before the merits

Since the representative of the Plaintiff Union is the president E and the E is not legally dismissed, the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff Union’s director F as the representative acting for the representative is unlawful and dismissed. In addition, since the Plaintiff Union’s representative E did not delegate the instant lawsuit to the law firm G, the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff Association without the power of attorney and without the power of attorney should be dismissed.

B. Determination

According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, 8-8 (including each number), the plaintiff union shall hold an inaugural general meeting on October 18, 2015 when 29 households from among the 36 household members of the 36th National Treasury members attend the meeting, and shall elect Eul as the head of the union, F as the director, and H as the auditor with the consent of 19 from among 20 expected members by a secret vote (person who has signed the bylaws of the Local Housing Association), and the consent of 20 members.

The fact that 10,000,000 won per each household of Ba is to be subsidized as construction contributions and reconstructed by a room that is granted a lottery ticket, the plaintiff union's representative on April 6, 2016 from the head of Songpa-gu to be E, and obtained authorization for the establishment of the housing association with 23 members, the representative on June 23, 2016 to be E, and the number of members is changed. The plaintiff union can recognize the fact that the representative of the plaintiff union was issued a unique certificate, such as a non-profit corporation with 26 members, the representative on April 11, 2016 to be E. According to the above facts, the representative of the plaintiff union shall be the head of the association, and there is no evidence to deem that E was legally dismissed from the position of the head of the plaintiff union. Accordingly, it cannot be viewed that the director F has the authority to act on behalf of the representative of the plaintiff union due to the dismissal of the president E. The defendant's defense on this part of this part is justified.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s official seal is affixed to the Plaintiff’s letter of delegation of the lawsuit against Plaintiff Law Firm G, and only the Plaintiff’s dismissal of the attorney submitted to this court by entering the personal seal in the letter of delegation of the lawsuit to Plaintiff Law Firm G cannot be deemed to be dismissed from the Plaintiff’s legal representative. Therefore, the Defendant’s prior defense on the merits of this part is

3. Conclusion

Thus, the lawsuit of this case brought by a person who has no legitimate authority to represent the plaintiff is legitimate and dismissed.

Judges Kim Hyun-jin

A person shall be appointed.