1. The plaintiffs' respective primary and conjunctive claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

A. The Plaintiffs are part of the sectional owners of the D Building, which is an aggregate building of 17th and 7th underground floors located in the Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, and the Defendant is a management body comprised of all sectional owners of the instant building pursuant to Article 23 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “the Condominium Act”).

B. Nonparty G and 24, who are the sectional owners of the instant building, filed a provisional disposition suspending the performance of duties (Seoul Central District Court 2017Kahap81568) and a provisional disposition appointing a manager acting for the manager (Seoul Central District Court 2017Kahap8154) with H, who was the Defendant’s existing manager, and received a provisional disposition order that suspends the performance of duties of the said H on February 10, 2017 and a provisional disposition that appoints I as the Defendant’s acting manager during the period of suspending the performance of duties of H on March 23, 2017.

C. As above, upon obtaining a decision from the court on January 2, 2018 to permit the convening of an extraordinary management body, I issued a notice of convening a temporary general meeting of the management body where: (a) the agenda item No. 1 was the case of dismissal of the manager H; (b) the case of appointment of the manager (candidate E); and (c) the agenda item No. 3 was the case of the enactment of the management rules (it appears that the management rules were not enacted until February 25, 2018; and (d) the temporary general meeting of the management body (hereinafter “instant general meeting”) on February 25, 2018.

At the above general meeting, a resolution was made to appoint the above E as the Defendant’s custodian (hereinafter “the resolution of this case”) with the consent of 1,579 square meters in total of 500 persons among the total 688 persons holding the instant sectional ownership (72.67%), and with the consent of 1,579 square meters in total of 2,778.6 square meters in proportion to the total amount owned by each sectional owner (56.83%).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 5 evidence, Eul evidence 1 to 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the argument is the resolution of this case.