The plaintiffs include claims that change the exchange in this Court and additional claims.

1. The grounds for this part of the underlying facts are stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of some content as follows:

(The main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). The "I" in the third first sentence of the judgment of the first instance shall be applied to "J".

The following "Skin golf practice range" (hereinafter referred to as "Skin golf practice range") shall be added to the third first judgment of the first instance.

The term “27th ordinary meeting” (hereinafter referred to as “the instant ordinary meeting”) shall be added next to the fifth ordinary meeting under the fourth below the judgment of the first instance.

Fifth below the fourth instance judgment of the first instance shall delete the part "by 28 persons from among the 40 sectional owners at the time of the first instance judgment and with the consent of 27 persons."

The following shall be added to the "Resolution to be amended (hereinafter referred to as the "Resolution") to the fourth below the judgment of the first instance."

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The Defendant’s main safety defense owner may bring an action for revocation of a resolution within six months from the date when he/she became aware of the resolution of the management body meeting, and within one year from the date when the resolution was adopted. Of the instant lawsuit, the part claiming revocation of a resolution in the instant lawsuit was

B. Article 42-2 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings provides that a sectional owner may file a lawsuit for revocation of a resolution within six months from the date he/she becomes aware of the resolution of the management body meeting and within one year from the date of resolution.

The fact that the resolution of this case was made on February 28, 2018 is as seen earlier. The fact that the plaintiffs submitted to this court the application for amendment of the purport of and the ground for the claim to the effect that the plaintiffs changed the claim to nullify the parking management regulations of this case to the claim to revoke the resolution of this case on March 30, 2020 is apparent in the records. If the whole purport of the arguments in the evidence as above is added to the above, K upon the request of the plaintiffs was present at the general meeting of this case and recognized the fact that K was participating in

2.3.