logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.02.12 2018나2010027
결의취소
Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, a resolution to appoint R as the defendant’s manager at the temporary management body meeting held on July 22, 2016.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (such as law, judicial precedents, interpretation and application of legal principles, recognition of facts and facts requiring proof, and judgment on issues, etc.) is sufficiently reasonable as a result of the judgment of the court of first instance on the basis of the litigation materials and arguments submitted to the appellate court before the citing the judgment of the court of first instance based on the litigation materials and arguments.

The reasoning for this Court concerning this case is as follows, and the part concerning the claim for confirmation and revocation of invalidation with respect to the appointment of each representative member of the plaintiffs of this case as to each representative member of this case as set forth in paragraph (2) below and paragraph (3) below, and the part concerning the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for additional determination with respect to the matters alleged by the plaintiffs as the grounds for appeal and the matters alleged by the defendant as the grounds for appeal as set forth in paragraph (4) below. Thus, this Court cited it as it is included in summary

2. (a) On the 10th page 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part to be dismissed “one who is a delegating person shall be appointed as “one who is a delegating person”.

(b) Each “62 persons” of the 19th judgment of the first instance court shall be composed of “12 persons”, respectively.

(c) On the 23th and 20th of the first instance judgment, the following shall be added.

(6) If the Plaintiffs, who are not sectional owners, exercise their voting rights on behalf of those persons who are not sectional owners, are null and void by the instant covenant (2012 Code), and accordingly, deemed that the Defendant’s 2007 Code (Evidence B8) applies to the instant assembly, the exercise of voting rights on behalf of those persons who are not sectional owners, is an exercise of voting rights on behalf of those persons who are not sectional owners, and Article 26(2) of the 2007 Code (Exercise of voting rights) of the 2007 Code.

2. The sectional owner who wishes to exercise voting rights by proxy shall designate one of the other sectional owners as his/her representative and confer his/her name and power of representation to the Representative Committee via the manager by the day before the meeting.

arrow