(a) Grounds for revocation of permission for establishment;

B. The meaning of the non-profit corporation's conduct detrimental to the public interest

(a)The cancellation of permission for establishment of a nonprofit corporation after its establishment is possible only when it falls under Article 38 of the Civil Code;

B. The court below held that the non-profit corporation's act of damaging the public interest under Article 38 of the Civil Code refers to an act detrimental to the public interest or an act detrimental to its general meeting of members after the incorporation of the plaintiff corporation did not exist among some members surrounding the election and operation of the chairperson, but there is no evidence that it was an act of an organization of the plaintiff corporation or the contents of the resolution at the general meeting of members, and that the defendant's revocation of the establishment and dissolution order of the plaintiff corporation of this case should be revoked in light of the records.

Article 38 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 76Nu145 Delivered on August 23, 1977

[Defendant-Appellee] Attorney Park Jong-soo, Counsel for defendant-appellee

The Minister of Korea Forest Service

Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu14 delivered on October 7, 1981

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

The cancellation of permission for establishment of a non-profit corporation after the establishment of a non-profit corporation shall be limited to cases falling under Article 38 of the Civil Act (see Supreme Court Decision 76Nu145, Aug. 23, 197). Article 38 of the Civil Act provides that the grounds for cancellation of permission for establishment are when the corporation conducts a business other than the purpose, or violates the conditions of permission for establishment, or does harm to the public interest. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the "when the non-profit corporation" under Article 38 of the Civil Act means the case where the institution of the corporation conducts an act detrimental to the public interest or the general meeting of members makes such a resolution during the period of time after the incorporation of the plaintiff, the non-profit corporation did not have any fact as stated in the judgment of the court below, but there was no evidence that it was an act of the plaintiff corporation or that it was a resolution of the general meeting of members. The fact that most of collected membership fees used for the purpose as stated in its reasoning does not constitute an act detrimental to the public interest of the plaintiff corporation.

In addition, considering the evidence Nos. 8 and 16 cited by the theory in light of the records, it cannot be seen that the contents were examined in detail, and therefore, the court below did not accept the evidence Nos. 8 (the theory of lawsuit was not adopted, but it is clear that the evidence Nos. 2 and 8 appears to be the clerical error in the evidence Nos. 8). Of the reasoning of the judgment below, even if the evidence Nos. 2 and 8 among the reasons of the judgment of the court below did not affect the conclusion of the judgment, it cannot be deemed to have violated the rules of evidence or failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations. All arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)