1. Ascertainment that the Plaintiff is the chief director of the Defendant.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part resulting from the participation.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The parties concerned are corporations with the purpose of running businesses, such as credit business, cultural welfare business, and educational business for members, in order to foster a sound national spirit and contribute to national economic development through the creation and utilization of funds, the improvement of the economic, social, and cultural status of members, and the development of the community, based on the mutual assistance spirit unique to the Republic of Korea’s unique cooperative organization based on the member’s voluntary cooperative organization. The plaintiff is a member of the defendant, who was elected as the president in an election for the chief executive officer (hereinafter “instant election”), and the defendant is a person who was elected as the chief executive officer during the election for the chief executive officer conducted on November 5, 2015 by the defendant as a member of the defendant. The defendant was a person

B. The Defendant’s election campaign and the Plaintiff’s election chief director’s election were completed on December 13, 2015. As the Defendant’s chief director, vice chief director, directors, and auditor’s term of office expired, the Defendant organized an election commission and held an election of executive officers on November 5, 2015. Among them, the Plaintiff and the Intervenor joining the instant election were elected as the chief director as the result of the Plaintiff’s election and the Intervenor joining the Defendant’s election as the candidate for the chief director. As the Plaintiff’s election of this case’s election and the Intervenor joining the Defendant’s 74 votes

C. On November 12, 2015, the Defendant’s Intervenor’s objection and the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s decision on invalidation of the election were submitted to the Defendant a written objection stating that “the Plaintiff has provided several money and valuables, entertainment, door-to-door visits, etc. to its members in violation of the executive election rules, and thus raising an objection to the result of the election.” The Defendant’s election commission, on December 9, 2015, made a resolution with the consent of two members among three members, stating that “the Defendant’s objection is accepted by the Defendant’s Intervenor’s objection and the Plaintiff’s decision on invalidation of the Plaintiff’s election” (hereinafter “instant resolution”), and on December 15, 2015, passed the instant