1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On August 18, 2008, the Plaintiff was established for the purpose of operating culture and arts education programs for disabled persons and promoting performances such as culture and arts festivals. The articles of incorporation at the time of establishment are as follows.

Article 3 (Purpose) The main purpose of Article 4 (Business) is to contribute to the revitalization of popular culture by expanding the scope of participation in culture and arts by discovering and fostering talents in the fields of culture and arts potential for persons with disabilities, and by expanding the scope of participation of persons with disabilities, such as promoting cultural arts performances for which persons with disabilities may participate, and to achieve the purpose of Article 3:

1. Operation of cultural and art education programs for the disabled;

2. Encouragement of public performances, such as culture and arts festivals together with disabled persons;

3. Collection of data and development of policies to revitalize culture and arts of persons with disabilities domestically and overseas;

4. Overseas exchange and cooperation in the fields of culture and arts of the disabled;

5. Other profit-making businesses necessary for attaining the object of the Association.

B. On August 18, 2008, the Defendant complied with the provisions of the Civil Act, the Regulations on the Establishment and Supervision of Non-Profit Corporations under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism and the Cultural Heritage Administration, and the articles of incorporation, etc., and (2) shall not conduct any business other than the purpose business specified in the articles of incorporation; (3) shall start the purpose business within three months from the date of permission; (4) where false facts are discovered in the application for permission of establishment, violation of the conditions specified in the above paragraphs, or violation

C. On May 16, 2013, the Defendant revoked the Plaintiff’s permission for incorporation on the ground that the Plaintiff violated the conditions for permission for incorporation.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that he is the Secretary-General and the director B, who is the Plaintiff’s assertion, arbitrarily embezzled fundamental property and used it individually, and the Plaintiff disposes of it without permission.