1. The claim for the first preliminary claim shall be dismissed among the lawsuits of this case, the exchange of which has been changed at the trial;

2...

1. The Plaintiff’s determination as to the legitimacy of the first preliminary claim is the first preliminary claim in this case. The Plaintiff asserts that, on November 4, 2010 and February 16, 2010, the Defendant corporation is obligated to contribute 4/6 of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff’s side, and submit a written implementation plan and a letter, and agreed to propose and promote the agenda items on the instant donation to the board of directors of the Defendant corporation, but did not intentionally hold a board of directors. In light of the principle of good faith, etc., the Defendant corporation is obligated to hold a board of directors on November 16, 2010 to implement the resolution procedure to contribute 4/6 of the instant real estate to the Plaintiff.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the statements No. 8-1-3 and No. 12, the defendant corporation submitted a written execution plan and a written statement to the effect that, according to the deliberation and resolution, 4/6 of the real estate of this case, which is fundamental property, will be donated to the head of Dobong-gu, the board of directors of the defendant corporation on Nov. 4, 2010 and 16 of the same year by presenting the agenda for donation to the head of Dobong-gu, the plaintiff corporation.

However, Article 16 of the Private School Act provides that a school foundation shall pass a resolution of the board of directors in transferring its basic property. Thus, if a school foundation’s basic property is transferred without a resolution of the board of directors, it shall be null and void even if it is based on

(Supreme Court Decision 93Nu22784 delivered on September 27, 1994). A director of a school foundation shall perform his/her duties with the care of a good manager pursuant to Articles 61 and 65 of the Civil Act applied mutatis mutandis by Article 27 of the Private School Act. If he/she neglects his/her duties, he/she shall be liable to compensate for damages to the corporation.

As such, the board of directors of a school juristic person shall preserve essential educational property and prevent unfair reduction of basic property.