1. The revocation of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding part invalidated by withdrawal of a lawsuit).

2. The Defendant’s implementation on March 11, 2015.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the basic facts is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the pertinent part of the judgment of the court of first instance is written as follows. As such, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In Part II, "Agricultural Cooperatives Act" shall be revised to "Agricultural Cooperatives Act (amended by Act No. 14481, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter referred to as "Agricultural Cooperatives Act")" (as at the time of the election of this case, hereinafter referred to as "Agricultural Cooperatives Act") in the front of "Public Notice of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs" in the 4th Schedule, which was in force at the time of the election of this case, under the following 9: (4) A cooperative shall not refuse to admit a person who is qualified as a cooperative member without good cause, nor shall it impose unfavorable conditions against other cooperative members.

Provided, That the admission may be refused to a person in whose case two years have not elapsed since his/her expulsion.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff lost the Defendant’s membership as a temporary shutdown at the time of the instant election, and thereafter did not acquire the Plaintiff’s membership through the membership procedure until then, the Plaintiff is not eligible as a party seeking confirmation of invalidation of the instant election.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed as unlawful.

B. According to Articles 105(1), 107, and 29(2)1 and (3) of the Agricultural Cooperatives Act as seen earlier and Articles 9(1)1 and 11(2)1 of the Articles of incorporation of the Defendant, a person who is not engaged in livestock farming business as the requirements for raising livestock more than a certain number of members of the Defendant’s association are not qualified as a member of the association, and thus, a person who is not engaged in livestock farming business falls under a ground for ex officio withdrawal. If a person falls under a ground for ex officio withdrawal, he/she is naturally disqualified as a member of the association, and the confirmation of the board of directors is convenient