이사당선무효확인 등 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. On December 3, 2016, the Defendant decided to hold an election to appoint one chief director, one vice chief director, and seven directors (hereinafter “instant election”) at the General Meeting of Representatives on December 3, 2016, and eight directors including the Plaintiff, C, and D were candidates.
B. The instant election was carried out by a representative, who is the method prescribed in Article 25(2)1 of the Defendant’s Election Regulations, to put a mark on not more than seven candidates among the candidates for directors.
According to Article 30 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the directors shall determine the elected persons in the order of majority voters, and if the number of votes obtained by the same candidate is at least two, the elected persons shall be determined according to the order of membership of the defendant community credit cooperatives.
C. On December 3, 2016, 130 of the delegates from 136, 2016 attended to vote in the election of this case, and the result of the ballot counting is as follows.
1) The first ballot counting (from the following to the first ballot counting);
As the result, it was found that the candidates of the plaintiff, C, and D, and other five directors, as shown in the attached Form, obtained more than 62 marks as 62 marks as well as more than 62 marks (i.e., the plaintiff whose order of membership of the defendant is the most late). (ii) The chairperson of the defendant election management committee determined five candidates of directors who obtained more than 62 marks as directors, as directors elected, and then publicly announced them, again to re-counting against the plaintiff, D, and C.
3) The ballot counting conducted only with respect to the Plaintiff, C, and D (hereinafter referred to as “the second ballot counting”).
As the result, it was found that the plaintiff, C, and D obtained 62 marks and 61 marks as shown in the separate sheet (the number of votes obtained is less than D. 4) as shown in the separate sheet (the number of votes obtained is less than D. 4) and the result of the second ballot counting and the second ballot counting are different from D, as shown in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as "third ballot counting") that D were obtained 62 marks as shown in the separate sheet (the plaintiff whose order of membership of the defendant is the last time is less than the plaintiff). The plaintiff, C, and D are re-related to the plaintiff, C, and D.