1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All the plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim added at the trial.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for adding evidence No. 10 to evidence No. 10.

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s primary claim (1) around the Plaintiff’s assertion, the chief vice president of the Defendant Union elected as an acting director of the joint president at the special meeting of July 23, 2005 of the Defendant Union, and the J and K decided to hold a new special meeting for the normalization of the Defendant Union (as of October 29, 2005), and the Defendant Union decided to borrow expenses for the special meeting from the candidates of the executives and return them after the normalization of the Defendant Union.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff 50 million won (hereinafter “the instant money”) who was run for the president of the Defendant Union was to use the money as the expenses for holding an extraordinary general meeting. Since then, the Defendant Union’s normalization was decided to return the instant money to the Plaintiff at the general meeting of liquidation of the Defendant Union at the end of 2009.

Therefore, the Plaintiff sought the return of the instant money and damages for delay to the Defendant.

(2) The facts of recognition (A) Nonparty L, M, and N, an auditor of the Defendant Union, demanded C, the president of the partnership, to hold an extraordinary general meeting on June 8, 2005, against the conclusion of the contract for construction works of C, which is the president of the partnership. As such C refused to do so, directly convened an extraordinary general meeting in accordance with the Articles of Incorporation (proviso to Article 17(4) and (5) of the Defendant Union (Article 17(4)).

(C) The non-partyO, who is an officer of the defendant association, filed an application for a provisional disposition prohibiting the opening of an extraordinary general meeting with the Seoul Eastern District Court 2005Kahap1607, but is dismissed on July 8, 2005). (B) Accordingly, at the general meeting of the defendant association held on July 23, 2005, a resolution was passed to dismiss the above C from the head of the association and to select J and the attorney-at-law as the representative of the joint president of the association.

(C) the articles of incorporation of the defendant association at that time.