1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation about the instant case in this case is "3. Basic Facts" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance.

4. Conclusions, other than revising the following, are the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on March 1, 196. A lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity or non-existence on the ground that there is a defect in a resolution to appoint an executive officer of a certain organization. If a person appointed by the said resolution is no longer at the position of the executive officer any longer due to the expiration of the term of office or resignation, etc., and a new executive officer is appointed thereafter, the lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity or non-existence of the initial resolution to appoint an executive officer is subsequent to obtaining confirmation of the past legal relations or legal relations, and thus lack of the requirements for protection of rights (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da24309, Oct. 11, 196; 2013Da3753, Sept. 4, 2014; see, e.g., the purport of pleading evidence No. 1; the defendant’s term of office and supervision over the Defendant’s school affairs and supervision over the Defendant’s 2014.27.17

In light of the above facts, there is no evidence to prove that the defendant appointed N as a supervisor after the defendant's successor, and there is a procedural defect or any content defect in the defendant's successor, the confirmation of the invalidity of the resolution of this case is invalid on the ground that there is a defect in the resolution of this case that the defendant appointed N as a supervisor by the defendant.