1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, Defendant B, Defendant J, Defendant J, KRW 4,950,00, and each of its money from January 21, 2014 to December 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 28, 2010, the judgment of invalidation of the election of the court on October 28, 2010 as to K, which was the chairperson of the Plaintiff as the party, became a chair, and Defendant B was appointed as the president’s acting representative at the board of directors held on November 11, 2010.

Defendant J supported Defendant B’s work as the Secretary General Acting for the Plaintiff at that time.

Defendant D, E, F, G, and H are in charge of the Plaintiff’s director position at that time, and Defendant I was in charge of the Plaintiff’s auditor position.

Defendant B voluntarily resigned from the position of the acting president on May 18, 2011, and Defendant C was appointed as the Plaintiff’s acting president on May 20, 201 as the board of directors held on May 20, 201.

However, on October 9, 2012, the court rendered a provisional disposition order to suspend the performance of duties as the president's acting director against Defendant C in the court.

(Seoul Central District Court 2012Kahap981) After that, L was elected as the president of the plaintiff on January 15, 2013.

B. In the process of occupying the Plaintiff Association building, the conflict between Defendant B and several representatives claiming a reelection for the entire members regarding the interpretation of the articles of association that provides for the method of selecting the new president of the Plaintiff after Defendant B was appointed as the representative of the Plaintiff’s president, which occurred during the process of occupying the Plaintiff Association building.

On January 11, 2011, some representatives delayed in the election of the next president, and the resolution was adopted to appoint M as a new extraordinary director in the general meeting of temporary delegates (the 101 representative general meeting) held on January 11, 201.

The number of officers and employees, representatives, members, and service employees in support of M and M was 150 on the same day, and the plaintiff association building was occupied by the defendant B and those supporting the defendant.

Defendant B, J, etc. dispute the validity of the resolution of the general assembly and is a legitimate president acting for the president.