1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant's business performance was conducted in July 2013 at an extraordinary general meeting on July 20, 2012.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where "the number of copies" in Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance is "the same as "the same number of copies", and therefore, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The court's explanation on this part of the defense is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion (1) Nos. 1 through (3), ① the Defendant’s former president, vice-president, and auditor’s term of office expires and the auditor’s chief director’s term of office is terminated, and ② C violated the Defendant’s duty to faithfully explain to the members of the clan that he/she should register on the register of clan members; and on the ground that he/she did not attend only 23 persons registered on the register of clan members until March 23, 2013, even though 69 members were present at the regular general meeting of clan members, he/she declared the meeting on the ground that only 23 persons registered on the register of clan members were not present at the time. However, it was erroneous in excluding the head of a clan and P who attended the above regular general meeting, and ③ even if the Plaintiff convened the general meeting on April 28, 2013, C, by asserting that the above general meeting is

Therefore, C is a person who is deemed inappropriate to conduct emergency treatment pursuant to Article 691 of the Civil Act, and the plaintiff is entitled to lawfully call a general meeting of the defendant as an auditor. The defendant is entitled to call a general meeting of the defendant on March 23, 2013. The defendant seems to have the nature of the plaintiff's horse expenses (such as travel expenses, etc. for participation) for participating in the defendant's general meeting on March 23, 2013, and the cost of postal production and postal service for the plaintiff's notice of convening a general meeting of April 28, 2013.