1. A resolution that the Defendant, at the Assembly of June 19, 2014, appointed C as the president, is invalid.

2...

1. An aggregate building consisting of neighborhood living facilities and viewing and assembly facilities at the time the basic facts are discovered. The Defendant is a management body established pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings to manage the instant building, its site and attached facilities.

The Plaintiff was a person operating the “E” restaurant by leasing No. 202 of the instant building, and the former president of the Defendant.

On June 19, 2014, the Defendant held a general meeting (hereinafter “instant general meeting”) and passed a resolution to appoint C as the chairperson of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant resolution”).

The relevant parts of the Defendant’s management rules (hereinafter “instant management rules”) are as follows:

Article 3 (Qualifications of Members) The members of the plenary session shall be members of the D Building Salesroom at the same time as the salesroom occupants of the D Building.

When two or more stores are jointly operated, or one person uses several stores and number of houses, it shall be one person even if he/she uses it.

The third executive officers of the Council (executive Officers) shall have one chairperson, one vice-chairperson, one general secretary, and two auditors.

Article 8 (Election of Officers) (1) The Chairperson shall be the actual representative (operator) of a store.

Article 9 (Qualification Requirements for Officers) (2) Each entry in the register of a building owner and an operator of a building in subparagraph 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, that there has been no dispute over the members of the Association [based] who have been two years or more as the owner and operator of the building, Gap (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 15, 19,

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. The Defendant’s summary of the Defendant’s assertion is expected to hold a general meeting on June 24, 2015 and elect a president. As such, the instant lawsuit ought to be dismissed on the grounds that there is no practical benefit.

B. In a case where an officer is again elected by a new general meeting resolution after a resolution to appoint an officer of a managing body of an aggregate building was passed, the absence or invalidation of a new resolution to appoint an officer is required.