[1] In applying for the registration of change of a corporation by the Housing Improvement Redevelopment Cooperative, whether the minutes and the certificate prepared in accordance with Article 66-2 of the Notary Public Act shall be submitted to the registered public official (affirmative)

[2] Where a general meeting is held in violation of the court's provisional disposition prohibiting holding of an extraordinary general meeting, the processing of an application for registration of change of corporation according to the general meeting resolution (Dismissal)

[1] Article 66-2 of the Notary Public Act provides that where a corporation registers, the minutes of a general meeting, etc. shall be authenticated by a notary public, and the notary public who certifies them shall attend the place of resolution made by the corporation concerned and examine the procedure and contents of the resolution, or shall hear from the person above a quorum necessary for the resolution from among those who made the resolution concerned or their agents about whether the contents of the minutes conform to the truth, and shall have the client confirm the signatures or seals of the minutes before the notary public, and then confirm that the contents of the minutes conform to the procedure and contents of the resolution made by the general meeting, etc., by entering the facts in his presence. Thus, in order for the housing renovation redevelopment association recognized as a corporation pursuant to Article 13(1) of the Urban Redevelopment Act to file an application for registration of change with a new officer, a notary public shall submit to the registrar a notarized document prepared in accordance with Article 66-2

[2] As long as the court rendered a provisional disposition prohibiting the holding of an extraordinary general meeting, it is reasonable to view that the resolution of the extraordinary general meeting held in violation of the provisional disposition is null and void, and therefore, the registrar shall reject the application for the registration of change of the corporation, and even if the resolution of the extraordinary general meeting held in violation of the above provisional disposition order is not null and void but is merely a ground for cancellation, the registrar shall dismiss the registration in cases where there is any ground for cancellation of the matters to be registered under Articles 159 subparagraph 10 and 66 (1) of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act. Thus, an application for the registration of change of the corporation based on the resolution of the extraordinary general meeting held in violation of

[1] Article 13(1) of the Urban Redevelopment Act, Article 66-2 of the Notary Public Act / [2] Articles 66(1) and 159 of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act

Applicant 1 and one other (Attorney Cho Jae-sik, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

The Dobong registry office, etc. of this court shall revoke the registration of dismissal of the head of the association, other than the head of the association, other than the head of the association, other than the director, other than the director, other than the director, other than the director, 4, other than the director, 5, other than the auditor, and other 6, respectively, and recover from each registration of change of the office of the head of the association, the head of the association, other than the head of the association, other than the director, 8, other than the director, 9, other than the director, 10, 11, and 12, other than the auditor's application, which was filed on October 12, 2002 by the Dobong registry office of this court. The application for change of the director is dismissed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Facts recognized as recorded;

According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized.

A. Non-applicant 1 is the person registered as the director of the union in the registry of the above union as the head of the association of the American Housing Improvement Redevelopment Cooperatives in Zone I (hereinafter referred to as the "Association in this case"). The non-applicant 2 was the person registered as the director of the union in this case, who was dismissed from the head of the association and the director by the application for registration of change in the order.

B. Nonparty 7 and 414 demanded from 1 other than the applicant who was the president of the instant association to convene an extraordinary general meeting for the purpose of dealing with the non-Confidence and the election agenda for the officers of the instant association. However, as the instant association neglected to do so, the instant association neglected to do so, it was decided on July 26, 2002 by applying for permission to convene an extraordinary general meeting under the provisions of the articles of association of the said association and allowing the non-applicant 7 et al. to convene an extraordinary general meeting for the purpose of the said agenda.

C. Article 18(1) of the articles of association of the instant association provides that the resolution of the general meeting shall be made with the attendance of the majority of the union members and with the concurrent vote of the majority of the union members present. Article 18(6) provides that where a meeting cannot be convened due to lack of gender, the general meeting shall be re-called, and in the case of re-call, the resolution may be made with the attendance of at least 1/3 of the union members and with the concurrent vote of at least 2/3 of the union members present at the meeting. Article 19(1) of the above articles of association provides that the minutes of the general meeting shall be prepared. Article 18(2) provides that the minutes shall be signed and sealed by the chairperson and the union members present at the meeting.

D. The minutes of the special meeting of the instant association dated September 15, 2002 indicate that only 418 persons out of 2,070 persons among the total members shall attend the general meeting minutes of 2,070, and that the meeting minutes of the special meeting of September 28, 2002 contain 697 persons among the total members shall attend the meeting minutes of 2,070 and the non-Confidence resolution for the existing officers including the applicant shall be adopted and the new officers, including the applicant, shall be elected as the president of the general meeting minutes of the instant association. Based on this, the applicant filed an application for registration of change of the corporation indicated in the main text.

E. At the time of filing an application for registration, the instant association submitted to a registry official the minutes of the extraordinary general meeting as of September 15, 2002, the minutes of the extraordinary general meeting as of September 28, 2002, the copy of the articles of incorporation, the written consent to the appointment, and the copy of the decision to permit the convening of the extraordinary general meeting as of September 15, 2002, which was authenticated by the attorney-at-law in charge of the notary law office as of September 15, 2002, to which the above minutes of the minutes of the extraordinary general meeting as of September 15, 2002 were written by the notary public as of September 15, 202, the above minutes of the meeting were written by the attorney-at-law in charge of the notary law office as of September 13, 202, without affixing the seals affixed by the existing president, and were written by the notary public to the effect that they conform to the procedure and contents of the above resolution of the extraordinary general meeting. The contents of the above application are consistent with 1 other 13rd.

F. On September 27, 2002, this Court rendered a provisional disposition that prohibits the holding of an extraordinary general meeting as of September 28, 2002 by this Court Decision 2002Kahap977.

G. Meanwhile, on September 28, 2002, the above applicant, non-applicant 7, etc. held an extraordinary general meeting of the union members of the instant case in violation of the above provisional disposition, and the general meeting held a resolution that the non-applicant 1 shall be dismissed from the union chief, non-applicant 2, non-applicant 3, non-applicant 4, and non-applicant 5 from the audit, and the non-applicant 7 shall be appointed from the union chief, non-applicant 8, applicant 9, applicant 9, applicant 10, and 11 as the auditor, respectively.

2. Determination:

The association of this case is acknowledged as a juristic person pursuant to Article 13(1) of the Urban Redevelopment Act, and Article 66-2 of the Notary Public Act provides that the minutes of the general meeting, etc. shall be authenticated by a notary public if the juristic person registers the juristic person, and the notary public who certifies them shall attend the place of the resolution of the juristic person concerned and examine the procedure and contents of the resolution from among those who made the resolution, or those who are more than a quorum necessary for the resolution from among those who made the resolution, or their agents, shall hear from the clients about whether the contents of the minutes conform to the truth, and shall make the clients confirm the signatures or seals of the minutes before the notary public, and shall state the facts and confirm that the contents of the minutes conform to the procedure and contents of the resolution of the general meeting, etc. are consistent with the truth. Thus, the association of this case, which is a juristic person, shall submit the registration public official for filing an application for the registration of the change of a new officer, and the facts that the special general meeting was lawfully held on September 28, 2002, 202, and the new general general meeting and the minutes and the directors and the minutes as mentioned.

However, according to the above facts, the minutes of Sep. 15, 2002 contain no signature and seal of 1, etc., the existing president of the association, as well as no signature and seal of 200, and there is no statement that the procedure and contents of the above resolution of the extraordinary general meeting pursuant to Article 6-2 of the Notary Public Act conforms to the truth. The minutes of Sept. 28, 2002 contain statements from 10 agents, including 7 applicants, that the contents of the above minutes are consistent with the truth. However, according to Article 66-2 of the Notary Public Act, the above resolution of the extraordinary general meeting should be rejected by a notary public, and the above 20 minutes of the 20th day of the 9th day of the 20th day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 20th day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 2nd day of the 30th day of the 2nd day of the 30th day of the above resolution.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the petitioner's application of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Hong Yong-il