1. Where it is recognized that the articles of association of the redevelopment cooperative or the regulations for organizational structure thereof, and the internal regulations of the organization are deemed to be effective in cases where it is deemed that the regulations of the organization significantly infringe on the equality of the eligibility for election held by the partners when they go beyond the necessary and reasonable scope of rights of the partners;

In a case where some errors were made in the election management procedure regarding the election of executives of a redevelopment association, the invalidation of the election resolution should be determined by taking into account whether, due to such errors, it interferes with voting by free judgment, substantially infringes on freedom and fairness, and affected the result of the election resolution, in a case where there were some errors in the election management procedure regarding the election of executives of the redevelopment association.

(2) Article 12(1) and Article 19(1) of the former Election Management Regulations (amended by Act No. 10268, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter “former Urban Improvement Act”) of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents (amended by Act No. 10268, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter “former Urban Improvement Act”) on December 11, 2014 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da204690, Dec. 11, 2014). The lower court held that “only the members who consent to the establishment of the association shall be eligible to be elected as officers and representatives,” on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, is invalid because it discriminates against the members who consent to the establishment of the association without any reasonable ground or excessively limits their eligibility for election. Meanwhile, the person who consented to the establishment of the association among the executives and representatives who expressed his/her consent to the establishment of the association.