1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Inc., the monthly money in the column of “(State)B” as indicated in the attached Table 1 Table, and Defendant C, the same Table.

The plaintiff is a managing body under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter referred to as the "Aggregate Buildings Act") composed of all sectional owners of A building in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the "instant building"), and the defendants are sectional owners of the instant building.

On August 25, 2005, the Plaintiff held a management body meeting to appoint Defendant B (hereinafter “B”), F, and G as a joint manager on the process of changing the manager and related litigation. While the above three persons were performing their duties as a joint manager, Defendant B and F applied for a provisional disposition against G on June 8, 2006 (Seoul Central District Court 2006Kahap1772), Defendant B and F retired from the manager and left as joint manager.

On May 15, 2012, the Plaintiff held a management body meeting and passed a resolution to dismiss Defendant B from the manager. However, the Plaintiff accepted the Defendants’ claims by both the first instance court (Seoul High Court 2015Na203513) and the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2015Na203513) in the lawsuit claiming the dismissal of the manager against the Plaintiff and F.

After the judgment of the above appellate court was rendered on May 30, 2016, the plaintiff held a meeting of the management body on May 30, 2016 and 16 of sectional owners attended the meeting and passed a resolution to appoint H as the plaintiff's manager with the consent of all participants, and F resigned from the manager on the same day

On the other hand, Defendant B filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the above resolution on May 15, 2012, which he dismissed from the administrator, against both the first instance court (this court 2012Gahap9332) and the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2013Na16956) and is still pending in the final appeal.

(Supreme Court Decision 2014Da27562). The Plaintiff’s provision on management expenses under the Plaintiff’s building management regulations concerning management expenses is subject to management expenses under the instant building management regulations.