1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 30, 2015, the Defendant Treasury held the 39th regular meeting on January 30, 2015 and held an election of executive officers elected by one chief director, one vice chief director, and eight directors, and the said election of the chief director was run by the Plaintiff and C.

B. At the above regular meeting, 119 of the 120 representatives, including the president, attended the vote, and as a result of opening and counting the ballot box of the president, the Plaintiff and C found the remaining one vote to C in the ballot box of the vice president in which C obtained each 59 votes, and C was elected as the president of the Defendant Treasury.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff demanded the re-inspection of the president’s ballot paper, and the chairman of the election management committee conducted re-inspection, and the number of votes obtained as a result of re-inspection was verified, and both the Plaintiff and C stated that there was no objection to the re-inspection.

On the other hand, the defendant's credit cooperative election commission made the ballot paper of the chairperson in yellow, vice-chairperson in white, and the director's ballot paper in white, and divided it into the chairperson, vice-chairperson, and director's ballot box.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although the election counting of the chief director of the Defendant’s credit cooperative should proceed at the election commission, employees of the Defendant’s credit cooperative run the ballot counting. The Plaintiff, representatives, etc. did not verify the ballot papers, and the ballot counting executor carried out the ballot counting by entering the number of the candidates’ names in the lick box. The ballot counting executor, without the consent of the Plaintiff and representatives, included one ballot counting from the ballot box in the number of the chief director’s ballot boxes.

The resolution of this case is null and void due to such apparent defects as above.

3. Determination

A. A dispute between the parties asserting that the employees of the Defendant’s credit cooperative have carried out ballot counting.