The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance is the purport of the claim and the appeal.

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the first instance court are the same as the grounds for the judgment of the first instance, except for the revision of the following, thereby citing them as they are in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (the grounds for the Plaintiff’s appeal is not significantly different from the allegations in the first instance court.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of first instance and the evidence submitted in the trial, it is reasonable to acknowledge and determine the facts of the first instance trial). Each “F Council” in the first instance judgment 6th, 8th 8-9th 8th 1st 1st 1st 6th 1st 6th 1st 6th 6th 1st 200, and each “F Council” in the last 7th 7th 7th 2nd 3rd 8, 9, 12 through 18th 18th 2th 2th 200, 8, 10, and 14th 14th 1st 20.”

From the first instance court’s 8th sentence to the same 9th sentence “C” of the same 8th sentence, “The above evidence shows that C paid KRW 100,000 to the Defendant Cooperative on September 10, 2019, KRW 200,000 to the F Council on October 11, 2019, and KRW 100,000 to the E Disabled on October 23, 2019, respectively, are recognized,” and “the fact that C paid to the Defendant Cooperative on October 23, 2019, appears to be 14th sentence of the same part.”

The first instance court's decision 9 4th to 7th sentence 2 of the same 7th sentence is dismissed as follows, and hereinafter referred to as "third paragraph" as "no.44th sentence."

In around 2015, the Plaintiff established “A after dissolution,” and received reasonable subsidies from the Defendant Cooperative. C had an effect on the result of the instant election by making a false statement without verification procedures, even if he knew or could have known of such fact.

However, the following facts are alleged: (i) the details of volunteer activities are reported in the name of the above volunteer group after dissolution, and accordingly subsidies have been granted; and (ii) the data submitted by the Plaintiff alone make clear the relationship between “A” and “H volunteer group.”