이사회결의무효확인의소
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
In accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the part of "1. Recognition" among the reasons for the judgment of the first instance which partially accepted the judgment of the first instance.
The Defendant’s summary of the instant lawsuit is legitimate, and the minutes of the board of directors (No. 27) appointing the Plaintiff as the director and the chief director of the Defendant’s corporation were prepared on September 3, 2014 without holding a board of directors’ meeting. Thus, the appointment of the Plaintiff is null and void since there is no resolution of the board of directors appointing the Plaintiff as the director and the chief director of the Defendant’s corporation. Ultimately, even if the Plaintiff was in the position of director and the chief director of the Defendant’s corporation from the beginning, or the Plaintiff resigned from the office of the chief director and the chief director of the Defendant’s corporation upon the submission of the letter of resignation. Thus, the lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff to confirm
The lawsuit of invalidity or non-existence confirmation of the resolution of the board of directors of the defendant corporation as to whether the plaintiff was appointed as the director or the chief director of the board of directors of the defendant corporation is normal, and therefore the person who has the interest in confirmation is entitled to be the plaintiff, but in this case, the person who has the interest in confirmation is entitled to be the plaintiff.
Therefore, if the plaintiff is not recognized as a director or chief director of the defendant corporation, the non-existence or invalidation of the resolution of the board of directors of this case does not reach any influence on the plaintiff, and thus, there is no interest in confirmation. Thus, the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case depends on whether the plaintiff is recognized as a director or chief director of the defendant corporation or not.
As to the existence and validity of the resolution of the board of directors on September 3, 2014, the articles of incorporation of the defendant corporation (Evidence A5) shall be the board of directors comprised of directors.