조합원지위무효확인
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
On May 4, 2016, in light of the process of filing a lawsuit for reexamination of this case and the contents of the petition for reexamination of this case, the court ordered the Plaintiff to provide litigation costs that “it shall deposit KRW 3,500,000 for the Defendant as security for litigation costs within seven days from the date this decision became final and conclusive,” pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Articles 117(2) and (1), and 120 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the ground that the request for reexamination of this case or quasi-request for reexamination of this case constitutes an obvious
As to this, the plaintiff was served with the order to provide the above costs of lawsuit, and did not provide the security not later than seven days after the date of confirmation.
(4) On June 9, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application for the cancellation of security against the order to provide the above legal costs, and the said application for the cancellation of security states “application for the cancellation of security under Article 125(1) of the Civil Procedure Act,” and this court does not comply with the order of correction ordering the Plaintiff to “if the Plaintiff’s application for the cancellation of security is intended to file an immediate appeal under Article 121 of the Civil Procedure Act, the Plaintiff shall pay a stamp therefor” on June 17, 2016. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s application for the cancellation of security cannot be deemed to be detrimental to the right to file an immediate appeal, which is the method of filing an appeal against the order to provide the security for litigation costs, and thus, the said application for the cancellation of security cannot be deemed to have an effect of an immediate appeal. Accordingly, the instant application for the