1. The plaintiff corporation's lawsuit against the defendant Jeonnam Women's Association in Gwangju and the Korean Democratic Press Association in Gwangju.

1. We examine the legitimacy of the lawsuit by Plaintiff B, ex officio, as to the legitimacy of the lawsuit against Plaintiff B’s Defendant Jeon-ju Women’s Association, and Gwangju Jeon-nam Democratic Press Association.

Plaintiff

The Korean Women's Association, expressed as the other party in the lawsuit in this case, is an affiliated organization of the Korean Women's Association, which is an incorporated association. Defendant Gwangju Southern Democratic Press Association is an affiliated organization of the Democratic Press Union, which is an incorporated association. Even one of the subordinate organizations of an incorporated association, if it has the substance as an organization and performs its own activities, it may be deemed as an unincorporated association separate from the incorporated association.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da60908 Decided January 30, 2009, etc.). However, each statement of evidence Nos. 27, 28, and 30 of the evidence Nos. 27, 28, and 30 cannot be deemed as having the substance and organization of Defendant Gwangjunam Women's Association, Gwangju Southern Democratic Press Association as an organization composed of a majority of its members, and there is no other evidence to recognize this differently, and therefore, it cannot be deemed as a non-corporate body separate from the Korean Women's Association, the Korean Democratic Press Association, and the Korean Democratic Press Association, an incorporated association, as it cannot be deemed as a non-corporate body in civil litigation.

Therefore, the lawsuits filed by the Plaintiff B against the Union of Women's Women's Organizations in Gwangju, and the Democratic Press Association in Gwangju are unlawful.

2. Defendant I, J, and K’s prior defense on the merits of the instant lawsuit is the cause of the claim, and thus, Defendant I, J, and K’s prior defense on the merit of the instant lawsuit to the effect that it is unlawful, since the parts of the instant lawsuit against them are substantially overlapping as the cause of the claim in the instant case No. 2013Gahap152 of the Court.

However, the claim against the Defendants (B, A, and C) by the Plaintiffs (I, J, and K) in the instant case and the claim against Defendant I, J, and K among the instant lawsuits is only the same as the basis for the claim, and there is a lawsuit between the two cases.