1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for this Court’s explanation are as follows: (a) the reasons for this Court’s explanation are as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, including the annexed sheet, except for addition or deletion of the following:

On March 11, 2015, the Defendant asserts that the head of the association was elected again by the union members according to the expiration of the term of office of the president of the association, and that the instant lawsuit concerns the validity of the past legal relations and thus there is no benefit of confirmation.

Although a lawsuit for confirmation is permitted to eliminate risks or apprehensions in relation to the present rights or legal status, even in the past legal relations, if it is influenced by the present rights or legal status, and it is deemed that it is an appropriate means to obtain a judgment on confirmation of the legal relations in order to eliminate risks or apprehensions in relation to the present rights or legal status, there is benefit in confirmation.

(1) In the event that a new election for the president of a cooperative was held on March 11, 2015, when the term of office of the president of a cooperative was expired due to the absence of dispute between the parties or according to the overall purport of the pleading, as the term of office of the president of a cooperative under the instant election was expired, G may be again elected by the remaining members other than 84 members who were determined to be disqualified as partners at the first instance judgment, and as a result, the election of this case became a previous legal relationship in the past.

On the other hand, the instant lawsuit held that some of the members who were elected as the head of the association from the instant election is not eligible for membership in the instant election.