logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.08.25 2017가합52141
해임결의무효 확인의 소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The relationship between the parties (1) The defendant is an organization consisting of 11 representatives from each Dong of the above apartment in order to promote the common interests of the occupants and to secure a good residential environment in managing and using apartment houses, incidental facilities, their sites, etc. within the Gwangju North-gu B apartment complex (hereinafter “the instant apartment complex”) pursuant to Article 14 of the Multi-Family Housing Management Act.

(2) On October 18, 2016, the Plaintiff was elected as the 406 representative of the instant apartment on October 18, 2016, and as the Defendant’s president on the 25th of the same month, and the term of office was from December 1, 2016 to November 30, 2018.

B. The main contents of the instant management rules are as shown in the attached Form, among the management rules of the instant apartment.

C. (1) On January 4, 2017, the following reasons of the instant case were as follows: (a) the Defendant’s directors and auditors were the 411 representative C, 402 representative D, 410 representative E, 401 representative E, and 401 representative F, the Defendant’s chairman of the instant apartment as the 406 representative representative of the instant apartment; (b) violated the Housing-related Acts and subordinate statutes and the management rules; (c) interfered with the progress of the meeting according to personal sentiment; (d) committed an act significantly impairing the dignity; and (e) proposed that the Plaintiff dismissed the Defendant’s president and the 406 representative.

(2) On January 17, 2017, the Defendant held a council of occupants’ representatives and resolved to dismiss the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s chairperson and the 406 representative with the consent of all nine other than the Plaintiff, who is an interested party, among 10 representative members present. Accordingly, the Defendant requested the instant apartment building election commission (hereinafter “election commission”) to proceed with the procedure of dismissal pursuant to Article 20(2) of the Rules.

(3) On February 13 to 14, 2017, and on February 16, 2017, the Election Commission set the Plaintiff at the Defendant’s president and 406 representative.

arrow