1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant is an incorporated association established on July 29, 1986 for the promotion of the welfare of the disabled and their families with disabilities, and the plaintiff is a person who has served as the branch president of the B sub-branch under the defendant (hereinafter “B sub-branch”).

B. On June 13, 2017, the Defendant held a board of directors (hereinafter “the instant board of directors”) and presented a disciplinary agenda against the Plaintiff. The instant board of directors (hereinafter “instant resolution”) passed a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff, not only the board of directors but also the board of directors from September 2016 to June 13, 2017, failed to hold a general meeting, thereby causing interference with the affairs of the plenary session due to the Plaintiff’s failure to normally operate the branch due to the expiration of the term of office (hereinafter “instant resolution”), and notified the Plaintiff thereof.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The decision of this case is null and void for the following reasons as to the purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion.

1) Article 37(3) of the Articles of Incorporation provides that the Defendant shall not have the authority to dismiss the president of another sub-chapter, which is a legal entity, even if the Defendant had the superior agency of the sub-chapters. Article 37(3) of the Articles of Incorporation provides that the dismissal of the president of the sub-chapters shall be null and void as it disregards the individuality and democratic legitimacy of any other organization, which is a legal entity. 2) The Plaintiff is the president of the sub-chapters elected through a legitimate general assembly resolution at the sub

In light of the principle of democratic decision-making, the person having authority to take action and the person having authority to appoint the plaintiff should be the same, so the dismissal of the plaintiff must be decided by the B branch, and the defendant cannot decide it.

The provisions concerning the dismissal, etc. of directors in the defendant's articles of incorporation shall not be effective for ex officio directors.

B. 1 The Defendant violated the procedure shall sufficiently explain the grounds for dismissal to the Plaintiff during the disciplinary procedure, and shall make a reply against this.