1. A resolution on the agenda items in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the attached Form No. 3 at a regular meeting held by the Defendant on March 27, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are co-owners of A (hereinafter "the building of this case") located in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul (hereinafter "the building of this case") which falls under the aggregate building under the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter "the Aggregate Buildings Act"), and the defendant is a management body composed of all sectional owners of the building of this case under the Aggregate Buildings Act.

B. On March 27, 2015, the Defendant opened a regular meeting of the managing body (hereinafter “instant management body meeting”) and adopted each of the instant resolutions.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1, 4, and 5 evidence (including additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The judgment of this Court

A. Determination as to the assertion of invalidity common to each resolution of this case 1) Article 27 of the defendant's Code which only provides that the majority of voting rights shall be "the majority of voting rights" as to the resolution of the management body meeting of this case is null and void in violation of Article 38 (1) of the Aggregate Buildings Act which provides that each resolution of this case is "the majority of sectional owners and voting rights". Therefore, in order for each resolution of this case to be valid, each resolution of this case does not meet the requirement of "the majority of sectional owners" in accordance with Article 38 (1) of the Aggregate Buildings Act, but all of the resolutions of this case are null and void. 2) Article 38 (1) of the Aggregate Buildings Act provides that the decision of the management body of this case shall be made by the majority of sectional owners and each majority of voting rights. Thus, according to each statement of evidence Nos. 27 of the defendant's Code, the defendant may have provisions concerning the quorum for resolution of this case, unlike the above provisions of the Aggregate Buildings Act.