logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.12 2015가합16403
이사지위부존재확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is an incorporated association established to contribute to the promotion of public safety and welfare through voluntary fire-fighting systems, safety facilities, etc. installation, maintenance and safety preventive activities, and fire-fighting promotion activities, as its members, including restaurants, film theaters, and singing practice rooms, etc., and the Plaintiff is a person who was appointed as the Defendant’s director on January 3, 2012.

B. On October 25, 2013, the Defendant held a board of directors meeting on October 25, 2013, and filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of a temporary resolution against the Defendant on October 25, 2013 by asserting that: (a) the Plaintiff and D, E, F, and G were dismissed from the position of each director on August 21, 2013; (b) D, E, F, and G, including the Plaintiff, were appointed as the designated party; and (c) the Seoul Central District Court decided to appoint D, E, F, and G as a director on August 21, 2013; and (d) the Plaintiff did not meet the aforementioned temporary resolution of the board of directors meeting meeting on October 25, 2013 due to serious defects in the convocation procedure or the method of resolution by the board of directors meeting held on October 25, 2013; and (c) the above court did not err in the misapprehensioning of the board of directors meeting on December 17, 2014.

C. On March 26, 2015, Defendant 1 Law Firm N, a resolution of the board of directors made by the board of directors on April 13, 2015, requested the Defendant’s president C to convene a temporary board of directors on the following grounds: “Any director D, E, F, G,O, and P, including the Plaintiff who is the client, requests a convocation of a temporary board of directors pursuant to Article 25(2) of the Defendant’s Articles of Incorporation; the agenda item was “an act of removal of directors who was remarkably unfair due to the removal and appointment of directors through the temporary board of directors on August 21, 2013.”

arrow