약정금
1. The Defendant’s KRW 41,801,100 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from January 17, 2019 to December 4, 2019, and the following.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff served as the Defendant’s representative director from January 23, 2008 to November 16, 2015.
B. On November 9, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with C on transfer and takeover of business with the content that the Defendant was operating at the time and that it transferred 27,000 shares issued by the Defendant, which were owned by the Plaintiff.
At the time, C agreed to pay the Plaintiff monthly remuneration for full-time advisers for one year from December 2015 to November 2016, 2016, and for one year from December 2016 to November 2017, each of the Plaintiff’s monthly remuneration for non-permanent advisers (hereinafter “instant agreement”).
C. After having taken office as the representative director of the Defendant on November 16, 2015, C paid KRW 12,667,000 per month to the Plaintiff as a standing adviser’s remuneration from December 2, 2015 to November 2016, and paid KRW 152,04,000 per month to the Plaintiff. From December 2016 to November 2017, C paid KRW 110,200 in total as a non-standing adviser.
C has resigned from the defendant's representative director on June 11, 2018, and D has taken office as the defendant's representative director on the same day.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 7 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, C shall be deemed to have explicitly ratified the agreement of this case after C assumed office as the representative director, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant shall be liable to pay to the Plaintiff 41,801,100 won [152,004,000 won for non-standing advisers (12,667,000 won x 12 months x 12 months)] and damages for delay.
B. The Defendant alleged that the instant agreement constitutes an abuse of power of representation or a breach of trust by the Plaintiff and C against the Defendant, and thus, is not effective against the Defendant. However, the written evidence Nos. 1 and 2 is insufficient to recognize it.