1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. A resolution of the general meeting of shareholders held by the Defendant on March 20, 2013 shall be confirmed as null and void.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 11, 2013, the Defendant’s directors resolved to hold the Defendant’s general meeting by a resolution of the board of directors, and sent a notice to the Defendant’s members on March 20, 2013 that the Defendant’s members will hold the general meeting at 10:30 on March 20, 2013.

B. On March 20, 2013, the Defendant held an ordinary general meeting at 10:30 a.m. on March 20, 2013, and elected D, directors G, H, I, J, Auditor, and E and F as the president, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The parties’ assertion violates the provisions of the articles of incorporation, such as that the Plaintiff was not convened by a legitimate representative, and that the convening procedure was not a notification to the Defendant’s members, including the Plaintiff, etc., and thus, the convocation procedure violates the provisions of the articles of incorporation, and thus, the Defendant asserts that the resolution made at the above general meeting is null and void and seeks confirmation of its invalidity by the instant lawsuit. As the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting on December 12, 2013 and ratified the resolution made at the general meeting of March 20, 2013, the instant lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution made at the general meeting of March 20, 2013 is asserted to be unlawful as there is no legal interest.

B. Determination 1) If an organization ratified the previous resolution at an extraordinary general meeting convened according to a lawful procedure, it was a new resolution with the same content as the previous resolution, and thus there is no legal interest in seeking confirmation of nullity of the resolution against the previous invalid resolution, which is not a new resolution (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da27596, 27602, Oct. 28, 1997). 2) The Defendant’s special meeting held on December 12, 2013 as of whether it was convened through a legitimate procedure, according to the following purport: (i) the Defendant’s representative C’s written evidence No. 9, 13, 17, 20, 21, and 1, 6, 9, 12, and 12, 1, 6, and 12, as a whole, to the Defendant’s members, including the Plaintiff on December 3, 2013.