1. On June 29, 2014, the defendant elected the president, vice presidents, and auditors at the ordinary general meeting of the year 2014, respectively, and is written in the attached Form.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The defendant is a clan that is composed of descendants of C 16 years of age as a middle group D, and the plaintiff is a member of the defendant's clan.

B. On June 2014, the Defendant issued a convening notice to hold a general meeting of the year 2014 and provided a convening notice only to the senior male members aged 20 years or older, and did not give a convening notice to the senior female members and the senior male members under the age of 20 years and the senior male members under the age of 20 years.

C. On June 29, 2014, the Defendant held a general meeting of shareholders in 2014 (hereinafter “instant general meeting”) and passed a resolution to amend the Defendant’s bylaws as stated in the attached Form, and made a resolution to elect the Defendant’s vice-chairpersons as follows.

The full purport of each statement in the name position E, the chairperson E, the F Vice-Chairperson L L, the representative N representatives, the representative of H L L L L, the representative of H O representatives, K- [based] of J audit and inspection representatives of Q Q - [based]] did not dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 through 4, and evidence Nos. 8 through 10 (including the number of pages), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant, while holding the general meeting of this case, did not call a notice for convening a notice only for the male clans aged 20 or older, and did not give a notice for convening a notice to female clans and adult male clans under the age of 20. Thus, the above 1.0% of the general meeting of this case.

A resolution of the general meeting, such as the paragraph (1), (hereinafter referred to as “instant resolution of the general meeting”) is null and void.

B. The defendant's assertion (this safety defense) was present at the general meeting of this case, and the resolution of the general meeting of this case does not contain specific matters concerning the plaintiff's rights and legal status.

Therefore, due to the resolution of the general assembly of this case, the Plaintiff did not have any risk or apprehension in the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status. Therefore, there is no interest in seeking confirmation of the invalidity of the above general assembly resolution.

3. Determination

A. In the case of a suit of confirmation 1 confirmation as to the defense of this safety, any person who has a legal interest in the confirmation or legal interest.