A. The facts of recognition 1) The Defendant is a company established for the purpose of repairing, manufacturing, and selling precision machines and electronic devices. The Plaintiff is a person who was appointed as the representative director of the Defendant on March 31, 2010 and retired on March 31, 2016. 2) On March 31, 2016, when the Plaintiff retires, the part of retirement consolation benefits in the Defendant’s provision on the Defendant’s remuneration for officers and retirement allowances is as follows.

Article 3 (Determination of Payment of Remuneration and Retirement Allowance for Officers) (1) The limit of remuneration for officers shall be decided at a general meeting of shareholders as stipulated in article 45 of the articles of incorporation.

(2) The retirement allowances for executives shall be governed by these provisions, and the final decision on the amount to be paid shall be governed by a resolution of the board

When directors or auditors (hereinafter referred to as "executives") of the second party have taken office or retired, they shall pay remuneration and retirement allowances after a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.

On July 20, 2013: The remuneration and provisions for retirement allowances shall be governed by the Regulations on the Personnel Management of Executive Officers and the Articles of Incorporation of the Republic of Korea.

Article 5 (Retirement Allowance of Executive Officers) The retirement allowance of executive officers subject to this provision shall be the amount calculated by the following formula (hereinafter referred to as "base amount"):

(2) Among retired executives, the amount calculated pursuant to Article 5 (1) may not be reduced or paid by a resolution of the board of directors, excluding the retired director himself/herself, with respect to a retired executive, dismissed, or retired executive officer who has particularly caused a serious loss

3. From August 2015 to December 2015, the Defendant decided to temporarily reduce the monthly salary of the desired leaver and the representative director by setting the period of emergency management as the period of emergency management. Accordingly, the Plaintiff received the amount reduced from normal salary until January 2016, but the Defendant announced the retirement allowance and bonus to be calculated on the basis of normal salary, not the standard of emergency management, at the time of emergency management announcement.

Accordingly, the plaintiff's retirement for three months immediately before his retirement.