퇴직금등 반환 청구의 소
1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Basic facts
A. The defendant (the trade name before the change: D) is a company with the purpose of manufacturing and selling video-processing technology-related products, such as black boxes and indoors, necessary for smartcars and smart home.
B. From March 20, 2013 to December 23, 2014, Plaintiff A served as a representative director who is the Defendant’s representative, and Plaintiff B served as the Defendant’s representative director from December 24, 2014. From February 20, 2014 to June 14, 2016, Plaintiff B served as the Defendant’s representative director, who is an unregistered director, and was working as the Defendant’s representative director from June 15, 2016.
C. On January 25, 2017, Plaintiff A entered into an agreement on acquisition of shares with the content of transferring KRW 2.2 million of common shares issued by the Defendant at the Econsium with the transfer price of KRW 2.3 billion. The Plaintiffs, F, and Econsium appointed F on the same day as the Defendant’s management manager, and entered into an agreement on appointment of management manager with the content of entrusting F with the exclusive and non-exploitation of the right to business decision-making, power to represent, and all other rights to engage in factual and legal acts with respect to the Defendant, which was performed by the Plaintiffs, the representative director of the Defendant.
According to the above agreement, the Plaintiffs were unable to perform the Defendant’s representative director’s duties from January 25, 2017, and F was to perform the Defendant’s representative director’s duties from the same date.
E. Article 38(2) of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides that “The payment of retirement allowances for directors shall be governed by the Regulations on Payment of Retirement Allowances for Officers (hereinafter “Rules on Payment of Retirement Allowances for Officers”).”
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion
A. According to the Defendant’s retirement allowance payment provision for executive officers’ retirement allowances according to the Plaintiffs’ retirement allowance payment provision, the representative director’s annual average conversion of the total amount received for three years retroactively from the date of retirement x (the annual average conversion).