beta
Text
The instant lawsuit is dismissed.
Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. (1) The defendant is a clan consisting of the lineal ascendants and descendants of C C, C, C, C, C, C, C, F, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, C, and C, C, C, C, and D, C, C, C, and D.
(2) The Plaintiff is the Defendant’s senior member, who was the Defendant’s secretary general from January 21, 2001 to January 20, 2003, the Defendant’s president from January 21, 2003 to January 20, 2005, the Defendant’s senior secretary general from January 21, 2005 to January 20, 201, and the Defendant’s president from January 21, 201 to January 27, 2017.
B. At the third disciplinary committee meeting on June 2, 2018, the Defendant’s disciplinary action (hereinafter “prior disciplinary action”) was imposed on the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff had intentionally inflicted property damage on the Defendant, such as impairing the dignity of the Defendant’s executives, impairing the honor of the Defendant, acquiring unfair financial gains, receiving unjust money and valuables, and intentionally inflicted property damage on the Defendant.
(2) On June 7, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request for review on prior disciplinary action. On June 23, 2018, the Defendant’s Disciplinary Committee dismissed the said request for review on the ground that the Plaintiff’s ground for review was unfair at the fourth Disciplinary Committee meeting on June 23, 2018.
(3) On July 2, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the invalidation of a prior disciplinary action with 544176 by the Seoul Central District Court 2018. On September 26, 2019, the Seoul Central District Court, in addition to the part that the Plaintiff obtained financial benefits by holding the money to be deposited in the Defendant’s account for a certain period of time among the grounds for the prior disciplinary action, and the remaining grounds for the prior disciplinary action are not recognized, and it is difficult to view that the prior disciplinary action is to restrict the Plaintiff’s right as a final source to the minimum extent necessary to raise the reasonable interest of the Plaintiff.