1. Of the main lawsuit of this case and the counterclaim of this case, the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is located in the Seoul Jung-gu C Ground D shop in Jung-gu Seoul.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around 1992, D stores with the size of 2nd underground and 5th above ground level in Jung-gu Seoul Central Government (hereinafter “instant commercial buildings”) were newly built.

B. On January 7, 2012, the nine sectional owners of the instant commercial building established the D Subdivision (hereinafter “instant prosperity”) around 199, and continuously manage the instant commercial building, including collecting and managing management expenses and parking expenses, etc. The E, who was the president of the instant prosperity, died on November 29, 201, the Operation Committee of the instant Subdivision (which was established on January 7, 2012 as the representative of 29 floors according to Article 25 of the Subdivision Regulations) was elected as the president of the instant Subdivision on January 7, 2012.

C. Meanwhile, around October 29, 201, F et al., a sectional owner of the instant commercial building, prepared a notice of convening a new management body and sent it to the sectional owners of the instant commercial building for the purpose of settling the instant prosperity and establishing a new management body. On November 11, 201, at the meeting held on November 11, 201, a resolution was adopted to dissolve the instant prosperity and to newly establish a management body in the form of an incorporated association and to appoint a manager. The F, G, and H, a sectional owner of the said commercial building, established the Plaintiff for the purpose of preserving and managing the common use area of the instant commercial building on January 11, 2012.

around April 2012, 22, including F, etc., the owner of the instant commercial building filed an application against the Defendant for a provisional disposition suspending the performance of duties by the manager of the instant commercial building, Seoul Northern District Court 2012Kahap239, and the said court rendered a decision on July 11, 2012 that “the Defendant shall not perform his duties as the manager of the instant commercial building, and I shall be appointed as the manager during the period of suspending the Defendant’s performance of duties,” on the ground that the Defendant is not the manager appointed at the management body meeting under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Building Act”).