logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.11.29 2015가합6053
관리단집회결의무효확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

In fact, the defendant is a management body established on August 1, 1995 with the entire sectional owners of a building A located in Young-gu, Suwon-si, a multi-unit building under Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "multi-unit building Act").

On March 26, 2014, there was a resolution to appoint B as a manager at the regular meeting of the management body held on March 26, 2014.

On March 13, 2015, the Defendant notified the sectional owners of the A-building of convening a regular management body meeting as an agenda such as the election of executive officers of the management body. On March 24, 2015, the regular management body meeting was held as the foregoing agenda.

On March 22, 2016, there was a resolution to appoint B as a manager at a regular meeting of the management body held on March 22, 2016.

Meanwhile, from April 1, 2013 to March 26, 2014, the Defendant’s management rules were amended with the content that “the term of office of a manager shall be one year, and the president shall be reappointed only once,” respectively, and the following day until March 31, 2016, the term of office of a manager shall be one year from April 1 of each year, and may be renewed consecutively only once.”

[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4-2, Eul evidence Nos. 5-1 through 6, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 8, and the defendant's summary of the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole oral argument, the meeting of the management body held on March 24, 2015 did not meet the quorum and there was no resolution appointing B as a manager.

In addition, B was appointed as a custodian on March 26, 2014, but at the time, the defendant's management rules set the term of office as one year, and thus, B's term of office as a custodian was expired as of March 31, 2015.

Therefore, although the management body meeting should elect a new manager, B exercises the authority as a manager by asserting that the term of office of the manager is two years, so it is the same as the entry of the claim.

arrow