1. We dismiss the lawsuit seeking nullification of the lawsuit of this case.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

Based on the facts, Plaintiff Mine Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Mine Construction”) is the owner and seller of the aggregate building “A” (hereinafter “the instant building”), which is an aggregate building in Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, and is the sectional owner of the instant building in heading 803, 804, and 104 through 1,106, and the Plaintiff Undo Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Plaintiff Undo”), around January 2015, the Plaintiff Undo Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Plaintiff Undo”) entered into an entrustment contract with the Plaintiff Minewon Construction Co., Ltd. for the management of the instant building.

Defendant A management body (hereinafter “Defendant A management body”) is a management body comprised of sectional owners of the instant building pursuant to Article 23(1) of the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings (hereinafter “Aggregate Buildings Act”).

On September 23, 2017, Defendant B held a management body meeting; at the above management body meeting, Defendant B appointed Defendant B as the manager of Defendant management body; set the management rules for the commercial building of the instant building; and passed a resolution to delegate the conclusion of the instant building entrusted management contract to the executives of Defendant management body.

On January 27, 2018, Defendant B held a management body meeting, and the above management body meeting adopted a resolution on the amendment agenda of the management rules of the building in this case, and on the appointment of the instant building controlled entity as another company.

(hereinafter referred to as "each resolution of this case" in total of the resolution of paragraph (d). [The grounds for recognition: the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and 7 (the evidence with the provisional number shall include the number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

(2) The plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of invalidity of each of the instant resolutions is legitimate and that each of the instant resolutions was not adopted at the meeting of the management body held in accordance with legitimate procedures, and that the plaintiff's claim for confirmation of invalidity of each of the instant resolutions is justified and that each of the instant resolutions was not adopted at the meeting of management body. The plaintiff's claim for confirmation of invalidity of each of the instant resolutions is asserted.

Article 23 of the Act on Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings.