1. On April 24, 2014 and June 23, 2014, the resolution of the council of occupants' representatives by the defendant against the plaintiff is null and void.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is the council of occupants’ representatives of the Yeongdeungpo-gu B Apartment-gu (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and the Plaintiff was elected as the Defendant’s president on March 17, 2013.

B. On April 3, 2014, the Defendant held a special meeting and passed a resolution requesting the election commission to proceed with the procedure for dismissal of the Plaintiff on the grounds of Article 20(1)4 of the Management Rules of the instant apartment complex. On April 24, 2014, the Defendant’s election commission made a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s office on the ground that: (a) the Defendant’s election commission held the Defendant’s vote on the Defendant’s motion for dismissal against the Plaintiff by means of a visiting vote (hereinafter “the Defendant’s vote of dismissal on April 24”); and (b) as a result, 663 households, 42% of all the entire occupants (1,576 households), participated in the voting, and 487 households, a majority, agreed to dismiss the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s office (hereinafter “decision of dismissal on April 24

C. As to this, the Plaintiff filed an application against the Defendant for a provisional disposition suspending the validity of a resolution of dismissal under the Suwon District Court 2014Kahap10036, and the said court rendered a decision to the effect that the Defendant’s decision of dismissal based on the dismissal voting is suspended until the final judgment on the lawsuit seeking nullification of the resolution of dismissal between the Plaintiff and the Defendant becomes final and conclusive.

However, on June 23, 2014, the Defendant again conducted the pros and cons voting on the Defendant’s proposal to dismiss the Plaintiff’s Chairperson through the election commission (hereinafter “the dismissal voting on June 23, 2014”), and as a result, 681 households, among all occupants (15,76 households), 43.2% of the total occupants (15,76 households), participated in the voting, and 501 households, which are the majority, agreed to dismiss the Plaintiff from the Defendant’s office (hereinafter “the dismissal decision on June 23, 201”).

E. As to this, the Plaintiff again filed an application against the Defendant for provisional disposition suspending the validity of the resolution of dismissal under the Suwon District Court 2014Kahap1076.