1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim against Defendant V is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' U.S. management body is against defendant U.S.

1. An ex officio decision on the legitimacy of a lawsuit against Defendant V is a management body’s decision on the appointment of a manager of an aggregate building, and the subject of legal relations arising therefrom is the subject of the management body’s decision. Thus, only by a decision on the existence or validity of a management body’s decision on the appointment of a manager, the resolution can effectively remove the Plaintiffs’ rights or legal status, or risks or apprehensions as to the legal status, from a valid point of view. The confirmation decision against an individual manager who is not a management body of an aggregate building does not have the effect on the management body, and thus, the lawsuit seeking such confirmation decision is unlawful as there is no immediate confirmation interest (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da30676, 30683, Oct. 28, 2010). As such, this part of the Plaintiffs’ claim seeking the confirmation that Defendant V against Defendant V is null and void as the manager of the management body of the Defendant.

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant management body

A. Basic facts 1) The E&T Industry Development Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E&T”)

2) The term “instant building” means U building (hereinafter referred to as “instant building”) which is an aggregate building of 15 stories above ground and 6 stories above ground on the ground of the Incheon Bupyeong-gu and 4 parcels.

The defendant management body is a seller of the building in this case, and the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings, composed of sectional owners of the building in this case, is the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings.

A) The Plaintiffs are a managing body pursuant to the instant condominiums. The Plaintiffs are the persons registered as sectional owners of the instant condominiums. 2) On October 23, 2015, the senior managing body, etc. holding a provisional managing body meeting (hereinafter “temporary managing body meeting of this case”). At the provisional managing body meeting of this case, a resolution to appoint Defendant V as the manager of the instant managing body (hereinafter “the instant resolution”) with the consent of 19 persons (57.58%) out of the total 33 sectional owners and 18,222.17 square meters of voting area, among 11,53.41 square meters of voting area (63.4%) out of 18,222.17 square meters of voting area, a resolution is adopted (hereinafter “the instant resolution”).