1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B and C, jointly and severally KRW 37,977,233, Defendant D’s KRW 27,732,243, Defendant E’s KRW 71,451,150, and each of them.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the managing body of the shop A in Seongbuk-gu, Sungnam-si, and F is the representative of the said managing body from February 2016.

B. Defendant B and C are the owners of the instant commercial building 402, Defendant D are the owners of 210, and Defendant E are the owners of 207 and the tenants of 128.

C. On January 26, 2016, the Defendant’s central shopping mall and the Plaintiff’s management body, who had been suffering from disputes, rendered a decision to permit the temporary management body meeting with the following agenda items from February 19, 2016, upon the application of 27 sectional owners, including the non-conforming No. 1 F, etc. on January 26, 2016.

In the management office on February 19, 2016, 45 of the sectional owners were present (or 91.71% voting rights) at the management office on February 14:25, 2016, and 57 of the sectional owners were dismissed from the manager, and the manager was F, and H was decided by 35 of the auditor (64.26%).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 7,8

2. As to the defendants' main defense

A. The Defendants asserted that the management rules should be set at the extraordinary management body meeting and that the executives of the regulations should be elected, but because the management rules were rejected and the F was elected as the representative, the F’s power of representation should be dismissed in an unlawful manner.

According to the evidence No. 8, there is no problem because the management rules are the standards of Gyeonggi-do, but the review of the specific contents was rejected by the majority opinion that the management committee delegates to the management and operation committee (which is 63.78%, 22.95%). As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s former manager G was dismissed and the sectional owner’s voting right was appointed as the Plaintiff’s manager with the consent of 64.26% at the attendance of 91.71%.

According to the above facts, the F's power of representation decided at the meeting of the temporary management body with the attendance and consent of a majority of the voting rights of the sectional owners is legitimate, and the management rules on the disposition, inspection, etc. of unpaid management expenses were not decided

(2) the appointment of the receiver.