logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.03.31 2014가단32199
제명결의무효확인청구
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is an agricultural partnership established for the purpose of improving productivity of livestock industry and increasing the income of its members through the rationalization of livestock management. The plaintiff is the defendant's member.

B. On June 10, 2014, the Defendant held an extraordinary general meeting (hereinafter “instant general meeting”) and made a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff on the grounds that “the Plaintiff incurred considerable damage to the Defendant by intention or gross negligence.”

C. The Defendant’s articles of incorporation relating to the instant case (hereinafter “instant articles of incorporation”) are as follows.

Article 13 (Withdrawal) (2) Members shall withdraw naturally when the grounds falling under any of the following subparagraphs accrue:

6. The products of an incorporated association shall be automatically withdrawn if they are not used for not less than three months.

Article 14 (Expulsion) (1) An expulsion may be made by a resolution of a general meeting, if a member falls under any of the following subparagraphs:

2. Where he/she has caused substantial damage to an association corporation by intention or gross negligence;

3. Where a cooperative has accrued undue profits by iceing the cooperative. (2) The cooperative corporation shall notify the cooperative members subject to expulsion of the reason for expulsion ten days before the general meeting is held, give them an opportunity to defend themselves at the general meeting, and notify in writing when determining the expulsion.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 2-1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 5, the purport of whole pleadings]

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant did not notify the plaintiff of the reason for expulsion 10 days prior to the opening of the general meeting of this case, and did not give the plaintiff an opportunity to vindicate the reason for expulsion at the general meeting of this case. Thus, the resolution ordering the plaintiff at the general meeting of this case is null and void due to procedural defects in violation of Article 14 (2) of the Articles of this case.

3. The defendant's judgment on this safety defense shall use the defendant's product for not less than three months, separate from the above expulsion resolution.

arrow