1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after filing the appeal.

1. In addition to the following parts, the court's explanation of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding parts of the judgment of the court of first instance:

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). The parts between 18 and 36 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be written in the following manner:

On May 19, 2012, the Defendant held a general meeting of shareholders (hereinafter referred to as “instant general meeting”) on the same agenda as indicated in the attached list, and made a resolution to resume the relocation of the members temporarily suspended after presenting subparagraphs 5 and 6 of the above agenda and to increase the basic relocation expenses per household average to KRW 180 million per household, and to bear interest on the loan of the basic relocation expenses, including the contribution, after paying the project expenses.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant increase resolution” and the two resolutions combined are referred to as the “each of the instant resolutions”). E.

On the other hand, prior to the instant general meeting, the Defendant, at the meeting of the board of representatives on April 19, 2012 (hereinafter “instant council of representatives”), was 78 at the time of the opening of 79 persons among the total 81 incumbent representatives at the meeting of the board of representatives at the time of the instant general meeting, and all 79 persons attended the middle and deliberated on the agenda of the instant general meeting.

In the present position, the general meeting of this case deliberated and resolved on the agenda item.

(hereinafter referred to as “the instant deliberation and resolution”). 2. The Defendant asserts that: (a) the Plaintiff’s primary claim was unlawful to add the confirmation of invalidity of the resolution on the instant agenda No. 5 to the primary claim during the appellate trial; and (b) the Plaintiff’s primary claim was lost the identity of the claim.

In other words, in the first instance court, the plaintiff sought a confirmation of invalidity of the "decision on the increase in the basic moving expenses", which falls under the agenda of subparagraph 6 of the general meeting of this case, and the resolution on the agenda of subparagraph 5 (the case as to whether it is resumed or not) is confirmed at the appellate court.