1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

In this case where the plaintiff seeks confirmation of invalidity of the resolution on each agenda listed in the attached list of the defendant, the defendant's defense of safety that the plaintiff is not a defendant's member, separate from the defendant's member, and the plaintiff's member is not the defendant's member, and there is no legal interest in the resolution of the general meeting of the defendant.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, the existence or absence of legal relations, which is a subject matter of lawsuit, is unclear between the parties and its relations are immediately confirmed, and there is a benefit of confirmation in the event that the risks or instability existing in the plaintiff's rights or legal status may be removed (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da40089, Nov. 22, 1994). In full view of the entries and arguments in evidence No. 1, No. 1, and No. 1, the plaintiff can be recognized as a member of the defendant as the defendant's branch of the defendant. Since the plaintiff is a non-corporate body with the subject of rights separate from the defendant's branch of the defendant, the plaintiff is not a member of the defendant, separate from the plaintiff's member of the defendant's general meeting, and therefore, the plaintiff cannot be deemed as a member of the defendant's general meeting of the defendant, and there is no danger

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful because there is no benefit in confirmation.

(On the other hand, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and 3, it can be acknowledged that a significant portion of each of the items listed in the separate sheet has been reserved at the special meeting on July 25, 2015, and the relevant part of the lawsuit in this case does not have the interest in the lawsuit because it does not have the object of seeking confirmation of invalidity thereof). Accordingly, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.