1. The defendant's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is that the defendant's assertion is insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion as additional evidence submitted by this court. The court's explanation of this case is that the defendant added or emphasized the following judgment to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the court's explanation is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except where the defendant added or emphasized the following judgment to this court.

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant asserts that the plaintiffs' intentional loss of membership through the change of the householder constitutes voluntary withdrawal and cannot be viewed as deprivation of membership.

(1) However, in light of the following: (a) the instant bylaws clearly stipulate that “a person who does not meet the requirements for membership under the relevant statutes and regulations shall automatically lose his/her eligibility” under Article 12(2) of the same Act; (b) the former is restricted by distinguishing the voluntary withdrawal from membership and the automatic loss of membership; and (c) there is no provision prohibiting the household member from being able to maintain his/her status as a householder permanently by imposing a duty to maintain his/her householder status on a permanent basis or by changing the status of the householder; and (d) there is no provision prohibiting the waiver of membership by changing the status of the householder.

B. The Defendant asserts to the effect that, by holding a board of directors on October 16, 2019, the amount of cooperative members’ common contributions should be deducted from the amount claimed by the Plaintiffs, since the amount of common contributions was determined as KRW 29,472,653 per household (including sales expenses, advertising expenses, and expenses for the establishment of public relations centers in business promotion expenses).

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 12, the defendant held a board of directors on October 16, 2019 and recognized the fact that the defendant made a resolution as alleged above.

However, as seen earlier, the Defendant asserts.