1. Of the instant lawsuit, the name of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation under Article 7(3)3 and the main text of Article 44(3) and Article 7(3).

Basic Facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties or may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, 5, Eul evidence 1-2, 3, and Eul evidence 2-4 through 9:

The defendant is a corporation established pursuant to the Act on Honorable Treatment of War Veterans and Establishment of Related Associations (hereinafter referred to as the " War Veterans Act") for the purpose of enhancing the friendship and welfare of persons of distinguished service in the Korean War and enhancing the honor of war veterans through the implementation of war veterans memorial projects.

The defendant shall consist of the headquarters, branch offices, and affiliated circuits, and the branch offices shall consist of affiliated circuits.

The Plaintiff was a member of the Defendant’s branch C Branch Association.

On March 5, 2015, the president of the Defendant’s chapter B against the Plaintiff recommended disciplinary action against the Plaintiff on the grounds that “(i) compliance with the articles of incorporation, regulations, ② abuse of authority (an act of monthly delegation), ③ membership harmony and collective resolution (mambin, verbal abuse, assault), ④ interference with the performance of duties by the president of the branch.”

On March 24, 2015, upon receipt of a request for deliberation of disciplinary action by the Chairperson of the Defendant, the Defendant Personnel Committee decided to dismiss the Plaintiff with the consent of all the members, and the Defendant Chairperson issued a disposition to dismiss the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant expulsion disposition”) in accordance with the above expulsion Resolution on the same day.

The War Veterans Act, the defendant's articles of incorporation and disciplinary regulations related to the relevant provisions shall be as specified in the attached Form.

In the lawsuit of this case, the plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff is legitimate to confirm the validity of the provision of the articles of incorporation in Article 7 (3) 3 and Article 44 (3) 1 of the defendant's articles of incorporation and Article 7 (3) 3 and Article 44 (3) 1 of the same article of incorporation are deprived of the qualification of a person registered with a state agency, and thus, the plaintiff seeks to confirm the validity of the above provision

Since the object of confirmation must be related to the existence of specific rights or legal relations, it is general and abstract laws or regulations as a lawsuit for confirmation.