(a) To seek confirmation of invalidity of a resolution of selection of directors at the beginning where the selection and appointment of directors and temporary directors is legitimate after the selection and appointment of temporary directors thereafter;

(b) Objection procedures with respect to the appointment of temporary directors following a decision of the court;

A. Even if a resolution of appointment of a director and a provisional director on December 25, 1968, which had been lawful after the act of appointing a director of November 20, 1971, is null and void, it is improper to seek nullification of such resolution, which eventually lacks the requirements for protection of rights as a lawsuit for confirmation, because it was attributable to seeking confirmation of past legal relations or legal relationship.

B. The appointment of a provisional director by the court's decision can only be subject to an appeal under the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act.

Attorney Park Jong-sung et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Han-chul et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Intervenor joining the Defendant

Daegu High Court Decision 75Na610 delivered on June 15, 1976

The appeal shall be dismissed. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal in this case are also examined.

According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the court below, if five directors of the defendant foundation were registered as directors on December 30, 1963 as well as the defendant defendant 1's intervenor 2, the term of office was expired on December 30, 1968, and the defendant defendant 2 held temporary convocation notice or the board of directors on December 25, 1968 using the seals of the directors of each of the plaintiff et al. who were kept in custody at the time of December 1968, all of 5 of them were dismissed, and the defendant 1's defendant 2's provisional appointment notice or the board of directors was held on the 19th of the above 19th of the 2nd of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 2nd of the 1st of the 19th of the 1st of the 2nd of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 1st of the 2th of the 1st of the 3th of the 2th of the 1st of the 1st of the 2.

At the time of December 25, 1968, the plaintiff asserted the invalidity of the illegal appointment of directors by the defendant joining the defendant with the defendant by the chairman at the time of the above 1968, and then the appointment of directors' provisional directors after the plaintiff sought the invalidity of all of them as a continuous illegal act based on the above illegal act. The facts are the same as above, and the court below's decision that the appointment of directors and provisional directors after the temporary appointment of directors at the time of November 20, 1971 was legitimate was made legitimate. Even if the resolution of the temporary appointment of directors at the early 25, 1968 was null and void, it was due to the plaintiff's request for the confirmation of the past legal relations or legal relationship, and ultimately, it is reasonable to make a claim for the invalidity of the past resolution to confirm the current legal relationship, or even if it is an essential condition, there is no benefit in the protection of rights.

As seen above, the judgment below to the effect that the appointment of a provisional director pursuant to the court's decision is only an appeal under the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act and there is no defect to invalidate it. It is not unlawful in the judgment below. It is not erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the interest and requirements of confirmation, or the lack of reason or inconsistency as pointed out by the arguments.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Il-hee (Presiding Justice)