1. The defendant's decision on provisional disposition against the plaintiff, such as Seoul Western District Court 2014Kahap767, suspending management activities.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) The party status of Btel building located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government was completed and the steering committee composed of representatives representing each floor has dealt with the management and operation of Btel building. The Plaintiff has been acting as the representative of the steering committee. 2) The 68 persons holding E and Btel applied for a temporary meeting of the steering committee as Seoul Western District Court 2014 non-hap39. The above court decided on October 15, 2014 that “the appointment of the manager, the election of the chairperson, the management method (change of the management company), the resolution of the management body meeting, the temporary meeting of the Btel management body for the purpose of meeting to enact the management rules,” and in accordance with the purport of the above convocation permission decision, E et al. took procedures for the convocation announcement, etc. of the management body meeting on November 13, 2014, which was convened by the management body meeting as the representative of the Etel.

B. On November 24, 2014, the Defendant (representative E) filed a provisional disposition lawsuit seeking the suspension of management (Seoul Western District Court 2014Kahap767) on the ground that the Plaintiff, without the resolution of the management body meeting, was a legitimate representative who had been elected among the representatives at each floor of Btels, and was in possession of all relevant accounting books and documents. On February 13, 2015, the said court rendered a decision as follows (hereinafter “decision on provisional disposition in this case”).

1. The debtor (the plaintiff in this case) shall not perform his duties as the manager of the Btel management body;

2. The debtor shall deliver to the creditor all the data, such as accounting books related to the management of the Btel building located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (the defendant in this case).

4. The debtor violates the above order of paragraphs 1 and 2.