1. The Defendant: KRW 13,983,296 for the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from May 28, 2015 to October 22, 2015.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On August 21, 2009, the Defendant was a cooperative established with the implementation of an urban development project in the area of the wife population C (the area included in Gyeonggi-do, Dong-si, Dong-si, Dong-si, and Dong-si as E), and the Plaintiff worked as the Defendant’s general manager from August 20, 2009.

B. On October 14, 2013, the Defendant, at the board of directors (six of the total directors, one of three auditors, and one of the three auditors), did not comply with the articles of association in the operation of the partnership, and abused powers, such as nullifying the board of directors and the board of representatives in the course of performing duties, and made a resolution with the approval of all the participating directors (hereinafter “resolution of the board of directors of October 14, 2013”) by making a proposal to suspend the performance of duties of the partnership as one agenda to prevent such abuse.

C. After that, on October 29, 2013, the Defendant rendered a decision on October 29, 2013 on the case of suspending the performance of duties by the president of a cooperative and on vicarious execution of duties (Article 28(1), (3), and Article 17(2) of the Association Articles of Incorporation), with respect to the cases of suspending the performance of duties by the president of a cooperative and the decision on vicarious performance of duties (Article 28(1), (2) of the Association Articles of Incorporation), and “the decision on October 29, 2013 for appointing a director of a company as an acting director.”

D. D.

The Defendant’s members H et al. filed an application against F, the president of the partnership for a provisional disposition of suspending the performance of duties with the Suwon District Court 2013Kahap457 based on the representative resolution of October 29, 2013 as of October 14, 2013, against F, based on the above board of directors’ resolution of October 29, 2013. However, the right to dismiss the executive officers of the partnership is limited to a general meeting and the board of representatives are not recognized. Therefore, the above application for the provisional disposition of suspending the performance of duties was dismissed on the ground that there is no right to be preserved on the ground

E. Meanwhile, on April 8, 2014, the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting and resolved to dismiss the said F with the consent of 178 members present, and to appoint I as the president of the partnership.

(f) F is thus dismissed by Suwon District Court No. 2014Kahap1043.