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

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The reasons for the attached Form shall be as shown in the attached Form.

2. Applicable provisions;

Judgment without Oral Pleading (Article 208 (3) 1 and the main sentence of Article 257 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act)

Judges Jeong Jae-in

1. Status of parties;

In order to build a partnership apartment with 396 households' 396 households' apartment units in Jeonjin-gu, Jeonjin-gu, Seoul. The defendant was a member of the plaintiff union, but the plaintiff union was expelled from the plaintiff union, and thereafter, the plaintiff union submitted a letter of withdrawal to withdraw from the association and interfere with the plaintiff union's business continuously.

2. As to the basic facts

A. As to the establishment of the Plaintiff Union and the commencement of its business

As a regional housing association member, the Plaintiff association was established with the authorization to establish the housing association in order to hold its house and to establish the housing association with the authorization to establish the project. Upon the establishment of the Plaintiff association, D, which was involved in the project of various housing associations, was the highest expert in the project of the housing association in order to obtain unjust benefits by participating in the project of several affiliated certified judicial scrivenerss. D, which was involved in the project of the Plaintiff association, began to interfere with the project of the Plaintiff association, and some of the affiliated members continued to join this.

B. As to the progress of obstructing partnership business

Accordingly, Nonparty D shall hold an explanatory meeting with Nonparty E, F, etc. who was a partner as the main axis.

In order to create unfair public opinion through actions such as actions and to interfere with the business by forming a counterclaim, and as its power has been expanded, Nonparty G, the nominal president of the partnership, was elected as the president of the partnership, and then he was in good faith in all the business affairs of the partnership as his agent.

Since then, Nonparty D, without the consent of the union members unilaterally terminate and terminate the agency contract with H which had existed, who would not have formally been able to benefiting, is the representative director of Nonparty I, who is his own title, and, in the case of the address of the legal entity, Nonparty D was a director of Nonparty J, who is known as the branch of Nonparty D, and was a full-time home of J. In the case of the address of the legal entity, Nonparty D was urgently established, and without obtaining consent from the general meeting of the meeting of this company and Nonparty G by using the official seal of the president of the association of this company and Nonparty G, the amount of money would be paid (in this case, it is confirmed by the court below that the relevant contract was invalid and paid, and at the present stage of the appellate trial).

Nevertheless, the non-party D rejected the withdrawal of the partnership by himself as the head of the partnership, but the competent authority was not a member of the partnership. After the general meeting held by the representative of the court, he would interfere with the partnership's business if he forms taxes with the union members who are satisfing themselves until the normalization is made by the representative of the partnership.

C. As to the withdrawal of partnership and the obstruction of partnership business

Since then, in the case of certain members of the Plaintiff Union, including the Defendant, they were subject to the rules of the Union, and the opposing forces including them were allowed to withdraw from the union upon the consent of the Plaintiff Union by submitting a written withdrawal from the Plaintiff Union. Since then, the Jeonju District Court 2013 Ga 2732 Ga 2732 Ga 2013 Ga 2732 Ga 2016 Ga 2016 Ga 2013 Ga 2013 Ga 2732 Ga 2016.

Nevertheless, even though they were clearly expelled and withdrawn from the Plaintiff’s partnership, if they file a civil petition with the Seoul-gu Office of Seoul Special Self-Governing Province to interfere with the business of the Plaintiff partnership, they have repeated actions such as continuing to file a criminal complaint against L, which is the president of the Plaintiff partnership and the president of the association (the decision on all charges is made).

3. As to the act of hindering operations of a cooperative through division of a cooperative and the solicitation of withdrawal from a cooperative

A. As such, the Plaintiff’s association has been interfering with the continued operation of the partnership, which is the condition that the Plaintiff’s association has filed a lawsuit on the claim for damages pursuant to Section 6281 above 2015.

B. However, even after the cause of the claim of the pertinent suit, the obstacles, including the Defendant, have continued to interfere with the Plaintiff’s business as above. Accordingly, the Plaintiff has made efforts for the success of the reference partnership business.

C. However, in recent years, the defendant sent the letter messages to his mobile phone members, which are still members of the plaintiff union, and cannot proceed with the business of the association because the plaintiff union is still liable for the enormous amount of debt. On the other hand, the plaintiffs including the defendant who already withdrawn from the association are likely to suffer enormous damages to all refund members, and their failure to withdraw from the association is clearly required to win the case of the claim for refund of the above contribution, and therefore repeats interference with the business of the association that helps them to immediately withdraw from the association (in fact, other persons other than the defendant are interfered with and interfered with them, and the method is also implemented in many ways other than the mobile phone text messages, but currently, although they are now taking place in a way other than the mobile phone text messages.

Based on the evidence secured, the instant lawsuit is claimed only in preference)

D. Ultimately, with respect to the Plaintiff Union, which is promoting the business of the Plaintiff Union due to a prolonged obstruction of the obstacles including the Defendant, and an illegal enforcement agency contract, the Defendant was already expelled from the Plaintiff Union, and the Defendant already submitted a letter of withdrawal to the Plaintiff Association, thereby spreading false facts, and repeating tort preventing the Plaintiff Union from running its business.

4. As to the claim for damages caused by the tort

In the end, the plaintiff has a right to claim compensation for damages against a tort that obstructs the partnership's business by spreading false facts to partners, including the defendant's repeated fraudulent qualification theft, and by soliciting the withdrawal from the partnership. Accordingly, the plaintiff has the right to claim compensation for damages of the amount as stated in the claim and then to obtain additional evidence.

5. Conclusion

For the above reasons, the plaintiff has the capacity to file this case for a judgment that is the same as the purport of the claim.