beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Seongbuk-gu Seoul store is a building consisting of one underground floor and five above ground, and the plaintiff is a 3/4 equity right holder of the 4,5th floor.
(s) 1/4 Right Holders C). (b)
B The underground floor and the first and second floors (hereinafter referred to as the "low floor") are the buildings subject to the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings, which include the sections located in the third and fifth floors and the low floor areas in the form of a sectioned building and the lower parts, as the structural independence of each partitioned building has been lost, and the partitioned ownership has been extinguished and the partitioned ownership has been jointly owned, but the remaining third and fifth floors are the buildings subject to the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings.
C. On January 1, 2006, the owners of Section B constituted the Defendant, the managing body, who is in charge of B's maintenance and management, consisting of all of the sectional ownership holders of Section B's sectional ownership, and thereafter the Defendant maintains Section B as the managing body.
A resolution was passed to select D as the chairperson of the defendant at the ordinary general meeting of the defendant in 2010, and the defendant's resolution was passed to dismiss D as the chairperson of the defendant at the ordinary general meeting of the defendant in 2014.
E. At the Defendant’s ordinary meeting on July 25, 2018 (hereinafter “the instant ordinary meeting”), the Defendant attended 129 of the 193 sectional owners (76 written resolution) and adopted a resolution to re-appoint D as the Defendant’s president with the consent of 128 members with the consent of 128.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence No. 12 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's argument at the general meeting of this case contains defects in the convocation procedure, such as sending a notice of convening only 117 persons among the 204 sectional owners.