2015Da222746 Governing the invalidity of the resolution of delegated wood ice ice ice

It is as shown in the attached list of plaintiffs.

AO intersections

Seoul High Court Decision 2014Na2029382 Decided June 4, 2015

October 13, 2016

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed. All costs are borne by the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity or non-existence of a resolution to appoint an executive officer of a certain organization on the ground that there is a defect in the resolution to appoint the executive officer, the lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity or non-existence of the resolution to appoint an executive officer again is incidental to seeking confirmation of the past legal relationship or legal relationship, unless there are special circumstances, such as where the resolution to appoint an executive officer again is deemed null and void or cancelled due to the procedural defect or the content defect (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2011Da69220, Jan. 27, 2012; 2012Da9716, May 29, 2014);

According to the records, the following facts are revealed. ① at the joint council of the defendant church on September 26, 2010, the resolution was adopted to request A Q to the delegated pastor of the defendant church (hereinafter referred to as “the resolution of this case”). ② The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of this case, thereby making multi-investment in the status of delegated pastor of A Q, and the defendant church filed the resolution to request A Q again from the Joint Council of July 26, 2015 to the delegated pastor, and the A Q again was approved by the AP council of the AP council of officers on July 27, 2015. ③ Although the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of this case, the decision was rejected as a new procedure of the AP council of officers of the AP council of the AP council of the Republic of Korea, the AP council of the AP council of officers of this case, and the No. 81 of the AP council of officers of this case, the decision was dismissed as a new procedure of the AP council of this case.

Examining these circumstances in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the instant lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of this case leads to seeking confirmation of the previous legal relationship or legal relationship, and thus, the lawsuit of this case becomes null and void due to lack of the requirements for protection of rights. Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is because the lawsuit of this case is not a legal interest. Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below is reversed without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, and this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly render a judgment. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed

Justices Kim Jae-sik et al.

Justices Park Sang-hoon

Justices Cho Jae-dae

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.