A. The defendant is the City/Do federation under the jurisdiction of the Korean Federation of Child Care Centers, which is an incorporated association, and the plaintiff was the chairperson of the subcommittee C among the seven subcommittees by the defendant's child care centers (hereinafter "C subcommittee"), who is the chairperson of the branch of the D branch, the Si/Gun/Gu branch under the defendant's jurisdiction.

B. On July 21, 2016, the Defendant opened a temporary directors meeting and presented the disciplinary agenda against the Plaintiff, thereby passing a resolution on the Plaintiff’s expulsion (hereinafter “the first expulsion resolution”).

Among the 18 voters at the time, 8 voters' opinions on expulsion, 4 voters' opinions on suspension of qualifications, 3 voters' objections to disciplinary action, and 3 voters' votes (referring to those who leave the voting place before the beginning of voting).

C. On January 10, 2018, the Defendant held a board of directors on January 10, 2018, and resolved on the Plaintiff’s expulsion with the consent of 14 members present (hereinafter “the second expulsion resolution”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, 19, 24, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. 1) Procedure Violation 1) The plaintiff is the chairperson of the first disciplinary resolution committee, and in order to dismiss the plaintiff, the resolution by the board of directors and the subcommittee shall be subject to the deliberation and proposal by the standing committee, and the defendant did not undergo the deliberation and proposal by the standing committee and the subcommittee. The defendant did not provide the plaintiff with an opportunity to vindicate. The defendant did not meet the quorum at the time of the first disciplinary resolution. 2) The defendant's articles of incorporation enacted in February 2017 in the second disciplinary resolution was subject to disciplinary action by the Ethics Committee, but the defendant was subject to disciplinary action by the board of directors.

The defendant did not provide the plaintiff with an opportunity to vindicate.

B. Although the Defendant did not have a disciplinary cause, the first and second disciplinary resolution was conducted on the same ground, the Defendant’s assertion does not constitute grounds for disciplinary action.

3. Determination as to the violation of procedure

A. The purport of the entire pleadings is the evidence prior to the first disciplinary decision.