임시총회결의 무효확인 등
1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the ordinary general meeting of January 29, 2016 shall be revoked.
2. This.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: “The consent of 738 members present among 993 members present,” “the consent of 573 members present among 776 members,” and 1. F. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for deletion of each paragraph. As such, this part of the judgment is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the
2. The Plaintiff asserts that there is a significant defect in each of the above resolutions, such as convening a board of directors or a general meeting by a person without legitimate authority to convene a meeting, and making each of the resolutions as stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “each of the instant resolutions”) against the Defendant Union, and thus, the Plaintiff seeks nullification of the objection.
A lawsuit for confirmation is permitted to eliminate risks or apprehensions with respect to the current rights and legal status. However, even in the past legal relations, even if they affect the current rights or legal status, and it is necessary to recognize that obtaining a judgment on confirmation of such legal relations is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate risks or apprehensions with respect to the current rights or legal status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da4011, Apr. 11, 1995), A’s evidence 2, and B’s evidence 33 and 34, according to the overall purport of the arguments and arguments, the Defendant Union held a general meeting on February 15, 2017 and passed the resolution on the agenda of expulsion of the Plaintiff’s members. After that, the Plaintiff submitted an application for withdrawal of a member to the Defendant Union on February 22, 2017 and approved withdrawal of the Plaintiff’s withdrawal, and the fact that the Articles of incorporation of the Defendant Union provides for the election of the president among the union members (Article 50(1)).
However, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is aimed at restoring the status of president of the defendant association, so long as the plaintiff loses its membership, each of the lawsuit of this case.