1. The plaintiff (Appointed)'s claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. The plaintiff et al. is the representative of the D Apartment-si D Apartment-si (hereinafter the apartment of this case)'s floor, and the defendant B is the former chairperson of the residents' autonomous council entering the apartment of this case, and the defendant C is the current chairperson.

B. The Defendants, while serving as the chairperson of the Residents' Self-Governing Council of the instant apartment from March 2008 to December 2012, 200, received management expenses of KRW 44,664,560 in terms of parking management expenses, and KRW 30,88,08,081 in total, KRW 98,372,641 in the name of the Defendants for the purpose of maintaining the long-term repair appropriations and maintenance expenses from the residents of the instant apartment from March 2008 to December 3, 2012. The Defendants did not disclose all of the above details of the withdrawal of revenues even though they were obligated to disclose them to the occupants, and accordingly, the Plaintiff et al. suffered damages equivalent to KRW 98,372,641 in total amount of the above revenues, so the Defendants are jointly and severally liable for compensation to the Plaintiff.

2. On the basis of the judgment, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone does not support that the Defendants did not disclose the disbursement details of revenues, such as management expenses, to the Plaintiff, etc. as residents, at the time of the Defendants serving as the chairperson of the instant apartment as the chairperson of the council of occupants' representatives. In addition, even if the Defendants did not disclose such details as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is difficult to view that the damages equivalent to the management expenses paid during the said period were incurred to the Plaintiff

(1) The Plaintiff’s assertion is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendants arbitrarily consumed and embezzled the management expenses received by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the Defendants embezzled the management expenses received by the Plaintiff, even though the Defendants made an embezzlement of arbitrarily consumed the amount equivalent to the management expenses not used for the prescribed purpose. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.