Whether the rights of the members of the Construction Financial Cooperative are qualified as full claims;

The investment of the members of the Construction Mutual Aid Association established under the Construction Mutual Aid Association Act is the shares of the members listed on the investment certificates, and the shares or equity rights of the said members are not monetary claims under Article 563(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore, the entire bonds are not qualified.

Article 5 of the Construction Financial Cooperative Act, Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Construction Financial Cooperative Act

Plaintiff

Construction Financial Cooperative (Attorney private Dong-sik, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Gwangju High Court Decision 78Na516 decided July 27, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The records reveal that the defendant union is a special corporation established under the Construction Mutual Aid Association Act. The capital stock of the union shall be equal to the amount of one unit of investment made by the union members. (Article 5) The union members may, with the approval of the Steering Committee, transfer all or part of the shares of the union members to another union member or non-union members licensed for construction business (Article 9). (Article 9) The shares acquired shall be disposed of as soon as possible (Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree) the union shall issue investment certificates (Article 9-2) to the union members. (Article 12 of the Enforcement Decree) The articles of incorporation of the defendant Mutual Aid Association No. 5 shall be the constructor who has obtained a license under the Construction Business Act (Article 12 of the Act). (Article 13 of the Union members shall be entitled to guarantee and loan of materials and purchase mediation (Article 14 of the Union members). (Article 14 of the Union members shall be 15 of the Mutual Aid Association's shares to the extent of the shares transferred by the union members.)

Therefore, since it is clear that the shares or equity rights of the union members cannot be a monetary claim under Article 563(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below that the non-party new construction corporation, which was the defendant's member, has against the defendant's association shall be justified in determining that the right to share is not qualified for the entire

However, according to the records, it is apparent that the assignment order of this case was served on the defendant on January 25, 1976 as the construction business license of the above new construction company was cancelled, and it is clear that the above new construction business license was cancelled, at the above time, there is no claim to return the amount of investment, and there is no objection that the company lost its membership, and the right to return the amount of investment would not occur, and this claim to return the amount of investment is not asserted until the court below. This claim to return the investment is a fact that the company did not assert the right to claim until the court below. Thus, this claim to return the investment cannot be attack the original decision, and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit, and it is therefore groundless in the court below.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of the appeal shall be borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Yong-chul (Presiding Justice)