The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed.

Of the total cost of litigation.

Judgment ex officio is made.

In a lawsuit seeking the non-existence or invalidity of a resolution of appointment of an officer at a general meeting of shareholders or the revocation of such resolution, the officer appointed by such resolution shall no longer hold the position of such officer, and thereafter, if an officer is elected by a new resolution of the general meeting of shareholders and the registration of appointment is completed, the new resolution of the general meeting of shareholders shall be deemed to have no interest in filing a lawsuit seeking the non-existence or invalidity of such resolution, or the revocation of such resolution, even though there are any defects in the resolution of appointment of an officer at the first general meeting of shareholders, unless there are special circumstances such as the absence or invalidity due to procedural defects other than the defect of the general meeting called the general meeting

(2) According to the records, the term of office of the Defendant Intervenor, who is the representative director appointed by the resolution of the instant general meeting of shareholders of the Defendant company seeking non-existence or invalidation or revocation thereof, has expired on March 27, 2015, which was after the date of closing the argument of the lower court, and the Plaintiff was elected as the representative director and completed the registration of appointment thereof. The remaining executives appointed by the resolution of the instant general meeting of shareholders do not hold the position of executive officers any longer for reasons such as expiration of their term of office, and the registration of appointment is completed after being elected by the new general meeting of shareholders as of March 30, 2015.

Examining these facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, insofar as there is no evidence to deem that the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders was nonexistent, invalidated, or revoked on March 30, 2015, the Plaintiffs did not have the interest in the lawsuit seeking nullification or revocation of the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.

Therefore, the lower court’s judgment regarding the instant lawsuit.