1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Basic Facts

The defendant is an organization established for the purpose of regular mountain administration and friendship among members.

Plaintiff

The designated parties (hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiffs") are the defendant's members who pay the defendant a membership fee and monthly membership fee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the defendant's defense as to the whole purport of the pleading was already ruled against the other lawsuit concerning the same issue. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is in conflict with res judicata, and the plaintiff is not qualified as the appointed party.

Judgment

Res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment is a principle that res judicata effect only on the legal relationship asserted as a subject matter of lawsuit between the parties.

(Article 218 of the Civil Procedure Act). The defendant asserts that the plaintiff's claim of this case is in conflict with res judicata since the judgment was made on the same subject matter in the prior suit (In Incheon District Court Decision 2016Da22076). However, the above lawsuit is a lawsuit filed by the plaintiff against C and D, and the res judicata effect of the judgment cannot be deemed to have been affected by the plaintiff and the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's defense that the lawsuit in this case conflicts with the res judicata of the previous lawsuit is without merit.

Furthermore, the fact that the designated parties delegated the authority for procedural acts from the designated parties is proved in writing (Articles 58 and 53 of the Civil Procedure Act). Since all the designated parties’ names and addresses are written and affixed to the letter of appointment submitted by the Plaintiff, insofar as no other evidence exists to deem that the above list was forged, the Plaintiff is the designated parties duly selected from the designated parties, and this part of the defense by the Defendant is without merit.

In 2015, the decision of dissolution was made to dissolve the defendant and distribute the remaining funds to 50,000 won per member at the ordinary meeting of the defendant's 2015.

Therefore, the defendant is against the plaintiffs.