1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 1, 2016, the head of the Gangwon-gun C (hereinafter referred to as the “Cponpon”) appointed the Plaintiff as the head of the Gangwon-gun B Ri (hereinafter referred to as “B Ri”).

B. On March 7, 2016, some of the residents of Bri requested the head of Bri to dismiss the Plaintiff from the Chapter B with the signature of 88 residents of Bri among 120 households, and C Myeon head received the residents’ opinions from March 10, 2016 to March 18, 2016, and notified the Plaintiff on March 25, 2016.

(hereinafter “Dismissal of this case”). [Grounds for recognition] The dismissal of this case is without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. On April 12, 2016, after the dismissal of the instant case, the Defendant asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful as a lawsuit seeking confirmation of legal relations in the past, as it was newly appointed D as a b Ri on April 12, 2016.

On the other hand, the plaintiff's assertion is currently in the present position of Briri, and the defendant is dissatisfied with it, so the lawsuit of this case is a benefit of confirmation as to the present legal relationship.

The defendant's main defense is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. Article 5 subparag. 6 of the Rules on Appointment of the Head of an Eup/Myeon, which provides that the head of an Eup/Myeon may dismiss the head of an Eup/Myeon ex officio, by hearing the opinion of the relevant Ri, when the head of an Eup/Myeon requests that 2/3 or more of the former households be in joint signature on the basis of his/her resident registration.

However, 120 households are 120 households, 6 persons who are not the head of household from among 88 persons who signed on the written consent of the residents of this case, 2 persons who are not the head of household from among 88 persons who signed on the written consent of the residents of this case, 10 persons who forged other persons' signature, and 19 persons who temporarily separated households for signing on the written consent of the residents is not a legitimate signatory, and 69 persons who are 2/3 or more from the previous generation.