1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing this case, is as follows, except for adding “H” to “F and G” following the third party 5 and fifth party 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and supplementing or heighting some of the contents as follows, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, this case shall be cited in accordance with

The gist of the defendant's assertion that there are justifiable grounds for refusal to commission part of supplement, is that the plaintiffs are the election management members of the apartment of this case, and they should immediately proceed with the duty of consent to the amendment of the management rules for the selection of defect repair business operators, despite the fact that ① file a civil petition with the Dong-gu office about the above amendment, ② interfere with the defendant's business or interfere with the exercise of rights (hereinafter referred to as "Interference with business, etc.") by putting together the voting method of the management office and rejecting the amendment.

In addition, the plaintiffs embezzled apartment management expenses such as using the expenses of the election commission voluntarily and as food, and violated Article 43-4 of the former Housing Act.

Therefore, there is a justifiable reason that K of the defendant's president refuses to commission election management members to the plaintiffs, and the appointment of this case is legitimate.

Judgment

We examine the plaintiffs' assertion that they committed acts such as obstruction of their duties by delaying the consent to the amendment of the management rules for the selection of defect repair business operators.

According to Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 32, 33, 39, 40, and 41, the plaintiffs filed a civil petition for part of the amendment of the management rules decided by the defendant with the office of Dong-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul, and the plaintiffs filed a civil petition for the part of the amendment of the management rules, the plaintiffs filed a civil petition with the office of Dong-gu after about two months from the defendant's resolution of the amendment, and the voting for the above amendment that was carried out by the method of directly visiting the management office is 9.71% of the