임시이사선임처분 취소
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. School Foundation D (hereinafter “D”) is a school juristic person which establishes and operates E high schools established on February 19, 1985, and provides, in its articles of incorporation, the fixed number of directors shall be seven (including one president). The board of directors elected at this time shall be held with the attendance of a majority of the incumbent directors and shall pass a resolution with the consent of a majority of the fixed number of directors.
B. Plaintiff A is serving as the president from March 27, 2013 (the term of office shall expire on March 26, 2018); Plaintiff B was a former director from April 7, 2009 to April 6, 2014; Plaintiff C was a former director from May 20, 2010 to May 19, 2015.
C. D, from October 4, 2013 to November 1, 2016, passed a resolution to appoint or dismiss directors by holding a board of directors at least 23 times.
On November 17, 2016, the Defendant revoked approval of taking office for six directors (F, G, H, I, J, and K) appointed by the respective board of directors pursuant to Article 20-2 of the Private School Act and Article 9-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, on the ground that the said 23th board of directors was invalid both due to the failure to meet the quorum and the failure to convene a meeting.
As a result, D's directors were remaining as Plaintiff A only.
D held a board of directors on January 6, 2017 to appoint executive officers.
For this purpose, the notice was given to each person listed in the table Nos. 2 through 6, in which the term of office was expired or resigned at the time with the Plaintiff, and the rest of the Plaintiff, other than the Plaintiff C and L, submitted a written confirmation of absence on January 3, 2017, a resolution was made to appoint M, N, andO as a director while attending the meeting.
(hereinafter the above board of directors is referred to as “the board of directors of this case,” and the above resolution of appointment is referred to as “the board of directors resolution of this case”). E.
Plaintiff
On January 9, 2017, A applied for approval of taking office in accordance with Article 20(2) of the Private School Act against M, N, andO elected as a director by the board of directors of the instant case, and the Defendant is not present by the Plaintiff C, the former director with emergency treatment rights on February 16, 2017.