beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
The plaintiffs.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. Judgment on the plaintiffs' grounds of appeal
A. As to Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Installation and Utilization of Sports Facilities Act (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Sports Facilities Act”), “a case where the agreement on the rights and interests of the relevant member is modified” under Article 19 subparag. 2 of the said Enforcement Decree shall include not only the case where the agreement on the rights and interests of the relevant member is explicitly modified, but also the case where the agreement on the rights and interests of the relevant member is substantially modified due to changes in circumstances such as additional recruitment of preferential members. However, in full view of the circumstances at the time of membership, the developments and necessity of the amendment of the agreement on the rights and interests of the relevant member, the details of the modified agreement and its impact on the rights and interests of the relevant member, etc., in a case where the agreement on the rights and interests of the relevant member could have been sufficiently predicted at the time of membership, and it is permissible to exercise the right of withdrawal
The court below acknowledged that Hyundai Cement Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Moement”) established the total number of its members under the rules at the time of recruiting the plaintiffs as regular members of the instant golf course as 1,035 (735 regular members, 300 main members). However, upon completion of the instant golf course on a scale of 36 holes, it changed the total number of its members to 1,880 (80 regular members, 1,000 main members) and additionally recruited new members, and then, it did not publicly announce or advertise the number of its members under the premise that the instant golf course is 36 holes, and instead, it did not constitute a second and third recruitment until the Plaintiffs were present.