1. Of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant appointed C as the president at the Assembly on March 31, 2013, and D as vice president and E as the general secretary.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is an organization whose members are older than 65 years old who have resided in the Daegu-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F and whose resident registration has been made. The Plaintiff became the Defendant’s member on January 22, 201.

B. On June 30, 2013, the Defendant made a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff at the general meeting, and all the Defendant members were 89.

C. Of the Defendant’s bylaws, the provision regarding the expulsion is as follows.

Article 9 (Expulsion) (1) When a member of a senior citizen center violates all the regulations, such as articles of association and operation rules, or interferes with the development of the senior citizen center due to a false spread of facts, a serious conspiracy, etc., and damages the honor of the senior citizen center, he/she may be subject to disciplinary action (including expulsion) by a resolution of at least a majority of the incumbent members present

Article 17 [Holding of General Meeting and Quorum] (1) A general meeting shall be held by the number of members present at a majority of the executives and members, and pass a resolution with a majority of the members present.

(2) The chairperson shall have a vote in a resolution and have a decision where the number of votes is equal.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul Nos. 2 and 3 (including the serial number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. On March 31, 2013, the Plaintiff seeking confirmation of invalidity of a resolution of appointment by the president, etc. on the ground of this part of the claim. The Defendant held a general meeting on March 31, 2013 to elect C as the president, and made a resolution to approve D as the president, vice president, and E as the general manager, and sought confirmation of invalidity of the resolution by asserting that the resolution was a serious procedural defect, such as failing to meet the quorum

However, as alleged by the Plaintiff, regarding the fact that the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff, held a general meeting on March 31, 2013, elected C as the president, and made a resolution with respect to the effect that D, appointed by the president, vice-chairperson, and E, passed a resolution with respect to the approval of the general affairs of the president and E, it is difficult to believe that each part of Gap’s statements of Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, and 11 are in accord with it as it is.