1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant’s establishment is an incorporated foundation established on March 26, 2012 for the purpose of maintaining and managing inspections and finance in B’s name.

B. According to the current rules of the defendant's articles of incorporation and the defendant's articles of incorporation, the defendant's board of directors consisting of five directors (one of them holding a concurrent office) (Article 5 and Article 13), and the term of office is three years, respectively (Article 10 (1) 2). The matters concerning the election and dismissal of directors, including directors, are matters to be resolved by the defendant's board of directors (Article 18), a majority of the registered directors, a majority of the registered directors, and a resolution of the numbers of votes of approval and disapproval shall be passed with the consent of a majority of the

(Article 17(1) and Article 11(1). On the other hand, a director shall not participate in the decision when he makes a resolution on his own matters in the election or dismissal of a director.

(Article 19). (c)

According to the Defendant’s corporate register, Plaintiff, D, E, F, and G were appointed as Defendant director on November 27, 2015, and there is no representative authority except for directors D. G retired from office on March 24, 2016, and C is each registered as Defendant director on the same day. (2) Plaintiff, D, E, E, F, and C are registered as having expired on the date three years elapsed from the date of appointment (from November 27, 2018 to March 24, 2019).

On July 9, 2019, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff, D, E, F, and C to the effect that the Defendant will hold the Defendant’s board of directors at around 14:00 on July 9, 2019. (2) According to the meeting minutes of the Defendant’s board of directors, the Defendant attended the meeting of the board of directors held on July 9, 2019 by the Plaintiff, D, E, C, and C, who are four of the five directors, and among them, decided to appoint D, C, H, I, and J as the Defendant director with the consent of three members, excluding the Plaintiff.

However, unlike the contents of the meeting minutes of the above board of directors, E expresses its intention to consent to the appointment of directors of C, etc. upon arrival at the meeting place of the defendant board of directors around July 9, 2019.