1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The basic fact D organization is an organization composed of the sectional owners of the aggregate building building E (hereinafter “instant shopping building”) in Si interest, and the Plaintiff is the owner who is the sectional owner of the instant shopping building F.

D Organizations conducted a short or a short-term operation for the instant shopping district F Lake on October 26, 2017 on the grounds that the management fees under the subparagraphs of the instant shopping district F were unpaid, in accordance with the management regulations.

Defendant B is the representative of the D organization from January 2019, and Defendant C is a person who is in office as the head of the management office of the D organization.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 2, 3, 5, 6, 12, Eul 1, 2, 3, 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was cut off or cut off the instant building F, and accordingly, the Plaintiff sustained 117,000,000 won between January 1, 2017 and 39 months (3 million won per month of the instant commercial building F x 39 months).

The plaintiff claims part of KRW 60,000,000 among the above damages against the defendants.

B. According to the evidence admitted prior to the determination, the suspension of the instant commercial building F, and the fractional amount are measures taken in accordance with the management rules of the D organization.

Defendant B was the representative of D organization around January 2019, and thus, Defendant B was not a person who was not the right to decide on a fractional measure on October 26, 2017, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and Defendant C was not in a position to arbitrarily cut off or take a fractional measure by being excessive to the head of the management office of D organization, and otherwise, Defendant B was in a position to cut off or cut off the instant commercial building F.

There is no evidence to view that there is no evidence.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion based on this premise is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed on the ground that all of the claims are without merit.