1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Of the instant lawsuits, the part of the claim for nullification of dismissal is dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant, as a resident of Incheon Metropolitan City, is a non-corporate group that has an original register in Yellow Sea and its descendants as its members, has one secretary general and one accounting staff, respectively. The Plaintiff was employed as the head of the Defendant’s secretariat around November 1, 2012.

B. On September 24, 2013, the Defendant held an operating committee and decided to dismiss the Plaintiff on the ground that 14 members present among 17 incumbent members lack of work performance and lack of responsibility, etc., and notified the Plaintiff that he would be dismissed for the said reason.

(c)Article 19 of the relevant articles of incorporation shall have the following officers:

5. The chairperson: One person's terms of office for officers of the central committee under Article 21 shall be three years, and he may be reappointed.

Provided, That the term of office of an officer appointed shall be the remainder of his predecessor's term.

Article 23 The secretariat shall be comprised of one secretary general and the executive secretary or staff, and the chairperson shall appoint or dismiss them.

Provided, That the secretary general shall be authorized by the operating committee.

Article 18 of the Election Management Regulations shall be the same as the term of office of the chairperson.

The head of the secretariat and the staff shall be dismissed and the retirement allowances shall be settled at the same time as the term of office of the chairperson ends.

The new president shall elect the secretary general and the staff.

Provided, That even during the term of office, it may be dismissed by a resolution of the Steering Committee.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 17, Eul evidence 1 to 3, 5, 11, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The fact that the term of office of the secretary general of the plaintiff to determine the claim for nullification of dismissal until March 2015 is no dispute between the parties. As long as the term of office of the plaintiff has already expired, it is impossible for the plaintiff to recover his status as an employee, so the part of the claim for nullification of dismissal of this case does not have any interest in confirmation.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da10027, Oct. 11, 1996). 3. Determination on the claim for monetary payment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Defendant’s dismissal on September 24, 2013 against the Plaintiff did not exist.