1. On March 27, 2014, the Plaintiff confirmed that he was elected by the Defendant Chairperson Election at the fifth Defendant Election at the end of March, 2014.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On March 27, 2014, the election commission of the Defendant (hereinafter “instant election commission”) held the election at which the Defendant’s Chairperson was elected (hereinafter “instant election”).

B. The instant election commission established two polling stations in B apartment 108 Dong and 115 Dong Dong, and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and one hundred and another

C. On the face of the instant balloting aid, the form of sweeted is new, and the other is not new on the other side.

As a result of the instant election on March 27, 2014, the instant election commission obtained the Plaintiff 161 marks, C 165 marks, and D 158 marks from among the total 497 marks on March 27, 2014, and added up that the invalidation marks of 13 marks have occurred. The invalidity marks of the said 13 marks (hereinafter “each of the instant ballot papers”), and the contents of the instant ballot papers are as follows. The number of votes is as follows: (a) the number of votes cast is not the 1D marks, but the 1D marks of the Plaintiff 4, the instant ballot papers of the instant 5 Plaintiff 67, Plaintiff 7, Plaintiff 18, and Plaintiff 13, and the instant election commission calculated that the instant ballot papers were invalid. (b) The number of votes cast is as follows: (c) the instant ballot papers with the 1D 10 column “D 10,” column 3, Plaintiff 4, the instant 4, the instant ballot papers indicated in the 5 Plaintiff 7, Plaintiff dong 1, and the instant ballot.

E. The Plaintiff requested a review of the validity of each of the instant ballot papers to the instant election commission, and the instant election commission received authoritative interpretation from the viewing of Namyang-ju.