2. C. at the ordinary meeting of the year 2014 held by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) on March 1, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s status as the parties concerned uses the instant building as a clan that jointly provides for E, and the Defendant is residing in the instant building since August 2005 as the Plaintiff’s head of the office, while working as the Plaintiff’s head of office.

B. On March 27, 2011, the Plaintiff passed a resolution to appoint the president of the ordinary general meeting and the president of the F. On March 27, 2011, the Plaintiff held a general meeting of shareholders in March 27, 2011 and passed a resolution to appoint F as president and G vice president.

C. On September 24, 2011, the Plaintiff’s final cause (1) filed a complaint with F with the investigative agency to the effect that “F transferred KRW 30 million from the Plaintiff’s deposit account to another account and embezzled it.” However, the prosecutor affiliated with the Suwon District Prosecutors’ Office was subject to a disposition of suspicion against F on October 26, 201.

(2) Meanwhile, H and I did not call a notice of convening an extraordinary general meeting on September 24, 201, when convening an extraordinary general meeting on the part of the president F, on the part of the Plaintiff’s auditor, for a considerable number of members who could contact.

In the above extraordinary general meeting (hereinafter “instant special meeting”), the president F and Vice-President G were non-Confidence and a resolution was adopted to appoint the J as a new president.

(hereinafter “Resolution on Special General Meeting of September 24, 201”) D.

(1) On September 24, 2011, F filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the special general meeting as of September 24, 201, on the ground that there is a defect in the resolution of the special general meeting as of September 24, 2011, including the fact that the lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the special general meeting as of September 24, 201 was brought against the Plaintiff on the ground that there is a defect in the resolution of the special general meeting as of September 24, 2011, which was in the absence of a notification to some of its members, and that J was appointed as the president of the court as of September 24, 2011. On the other hand, the lawsuit against J as of this Court 2011Kahap542, the principal lawsuit as of this Court, as of September 20