1. All plaintiffs' lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 21, 2016, the Defendant is a housing redevelopment project partnership which obtained authorization from the head of the Gu on December 21, 2016 for the purpose of implementing a housing redevelopment project in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Bdong (hereinafter “instant rearrangement zone”), and the Plaintiffs are owners of land, etc. in the instant rearrangement zone.

B. On January 2016, the Defendant’s overall transfer promotion committee for AHousing Redevelopment and Improvement Project Cooperatives (hereinafter “instant promotion committee”) conducted an open bid to select a specialized management company of rearrangement projects three times, but all of the participating companies failed due to the lack of participating companies.

C. Since then, the instant promotion committee, upon conducting a competitive tendering procedure on May 12, 2016, selected three companies as specialized management business entities to present light learning companies, the development of the Sejong City, and the Jeju CM as the specialized management business entities to the residents’ general meeting. On June 30, 2016, the promotion committee held a residents’ general meeting and passed a resolution on the “to select light light learning companies among the three companies as specialized management business entities and to enter into the contract” (hereinafter “resolution of the residents’ general meeting”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The Defendant’s assertion that: (a) held an ordinary meeting on May 26, 2017 to select light learning as a management entity specialized in improvement projects; and (b) passed a resolution to approve a contract with the said company; (c) thus, the Plaintiffs’ lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the residents’ general meeting of this case lacks the requirements for protection of rights, and thus, is unlawful.

B. Where an association established as a juristic person with the approval of the establishment of an association by opening a general meeting of association and a resolution of approval or ratification of the resolution of selection of a contractor at the general meeting of residents or at the general meeting of owners of land, etc. was made