주식회사 이사해임의 소
1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part demanding the dismissal of the representative director shall be dismissed.
2. Defendant C, Inc.
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company that engages in the export and import brokerage of defense materials, etc.
On February 1, 2011, Defendant C was appointed as the director and the representative director of Defendant C, and he was reappointed on February 1, 2014.
The plaintiff is the inside director and the shareholder of the defendant company.
B. The Plaintiff and Defendant C hold 20,000 shares of each of 40,000 shares issued by the Defendant Company.
The defendant company is a small-scale company of less than one billion won capital, and only the plaintiff C2 and the board of directors did not have a separate board of directors.
C. On February 4, 2014, Defendant C was charged with the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) that embezzled KRW 529,187,670, which was kept in the line of duty for Defendant C as Seoul Central District Court 2014Gohap126.
On February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application for permission to convene a temporary general meeting of shareholders with the Seoul Western District Court 2014 non-hap78 on the agenda of the meeting with the Defendant’s representative director and the director’s dismissal agenda against Defendant C, and received a decision from the above court on February 12, 201
Accordingly, at the temporary general meeting of shareholders of the defendant company held on March 24, 2015, the representative director and the director's dismissal agenda against the defendant C were votedd, but it was rejected as below the quorum.
E. On April 20, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking to dismiss the Defendant C from office as a director or representative director of the Defendant Company, pursuant to Article 385(2) of the Commercial Act, as a shareholder who holds shares equivalent to at least 3/100 of the total number of shares issued by the Defendant Company, within one month.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, 41, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 7-1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim for dismissal of the representative director among the instant lawsuit is lawful, the Plaintiff requested the dismissal of the office of the representative director of Defendant C’s company.