1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

The defendant is an incorporated association established with the aim of widely spreading ice-related sports campaigns to citizens to improve the physical strength of the people, and supporting and fostering athletes and their organizations, and fostering outstanding players, thereby contributing to enhancing the national prestige.

The grounds for Article 13(1)1 of the Regulations of the Disciplinary Committee under Chapter III of the Disciplinary Committee include the act of filing a complaint several times during the period of disciplinary action (such as the executive officers of the Federation, members of the Committee, registration of official documents, and provision of cocosting guidance). On May 2, 2010, the Plaintiff received the notification of the following matters from the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “the notification of the matters on the resolution of the Defendant Disciplinary Committee”) “the notification of the resolution of the Disciplinary Committee” (hereinafter referred to as “the notification of May 2, 2010”): The disciplinary action on May 19, 2010, based on the matters on the disciplinary decision on May 19, 2010 - the details of the disciplinary action are the act of filing a complaint under the name of the Plaintiff on May 19, 201, such as the act of registering the form of the executive members of the Committee, members of the Committee, and the act of guiding coscambling.

[Based on recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 6, and Eul evidence Nos. 5, and the plaintiff's argument to the purport of the whole pleadings added more unfavorable contents than the content of the previous disciplinary action. Thus, it constitutes a separate disciplinary action from the disciplinary action on May 2, 2010. This is made in accordance with the provision of the detailed disciplinary rules for the acts disturbing order in the stadium amended after the disciplinary action on May 2, 2010, which prohibits "the entry into the stadium of the expelled person is completely prohibited." Thus, it is contrary to the principle of retroactive prohibition, such as law, and the principle of trust protection, which is inconsistent with the content of the disciplinary action conducted on May 2, 2010, and thus, the above disciplinary action is added.