1. On August 22, 2013, the Defendant confirms that the resolution dismissing the Plaintiff at an extraordinary general meeting is null and void.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

1. Basic facts

A. A. Around December 2006, the Defendant promoted the construction of a building for fishery market direct sales stores in Incheon, Incheon, Incheon, which was created by reclaiming public waters by Incheon Metropolitan City. Around May 2008, the Defendant obtained a permit to implement a fishery harbor development project from Incheon Metropolitan City and implemented a new construction project with a subsidy of KRW 200 million and the Defendant’s share of KRW 640 million.

After the construction of the above new building was completed on January 1, 2009, the building was reverted to Incheon Metropolitan City pursuant to the former Fishing Villages and Fishery Harbors (amended by Act No. 9401, Jan. 30, 2009; hereinafter “former Fishing Villages and Fishery Harbors”) and the defendant filed a report of free use and profit-making. On February 20, 2009, Incheon Metropolitan City received approval for use on April 1, 2009, the said report was accepted by setting the free use period from January 20, 2009 to January 19, 2025.

B. As a member of the Defendant’s fraternity, the Plaintiff assumed KRW 17 million out of the costs of constructing the said fishery product direct store building, and was entitled to operate the store No. 2 within the said fishery product direct store building (hereinafter “instant store”).

C. Around August 8, 2013, the head of a fishing village fraternity E, the Defendant’s representative, submitted a written proposal for expulsion to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 29(2) of the Articles of Incorporation, stating that the Plaintiff “the illegal trade in public property and the honor of the fishing village fraternity B” and that the members submitted a written proposal for expulsion to the Plaintiff. On August 22, 2013, a general meeting is to be held, and the case against the Plaintiff was presented and explained.

At the Defendant’s extraordinary general meeting held on August 22, 2013, 18 of the total members of the 22 community members (excluding the Plaintiff himself/herself) present at the meeting and 15 of them agreed on the agenda, and 3 of them opposed to the resolution of the Plaintiff’s proposal was passed.

(hereinafter “instant expulsion Resolution”). E.

The main relevant provisions of the defendant's articles of incorporation are as shown in the attached Form.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, 6, 16, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, Eul evidence 7, 10, 11, 15, respectively.