2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is entitled to 623,951 against the defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff).

A. Since the Plaintiff was appointed as a director of the Defendant Company engaging in the business of sports promotion betting tickets on March 31, 2003, the Plaintiff was engaged in the business of operating external goods, building systems, and marketing operations. On March 20, 2012, the Plaintiff was reappointed as an internal director.

B. The Defendant Company, on June 30, 2012, dismissed the Plaintiff and completed the registration of resignation on July 3, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Eul's statement of No. 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. Determination as to the claim on the principal lawsuit

A. On April 2012, the Plaintiff’s assertion was revealed that the act of occupational embezzlement of C, a director of the Defendant Company, was revealed, and there was suspicion that the Plaintiff received money from C as an act of occupational embezzlement.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff issued a blank and a certificate of personal seal affixed with the Plaintiff’s seal imprint affixed to the Defendant Company to guarantee his/her confession. The Defendant Company voluntarily prepared a resignation letter (No. 12-1, hereinafter “the resignation letter”) in the above blank, and then handled the Plaintiff’s resignation. There was no fact that the Plaintiff had expressed his/her intention to resign to the Defendant Company.

Therefore, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the Plaintiff a monthly remuneration of KRW 24,461,120 from August 2012 to August 2012, which was after the disposition of resignation as above. Accordingly, the Defendant Company claims the amount stated in the purport of the claim, which is a part

B. 1) The authenticity of the letter of resignation in this case is presumed to be true when the signature, seal, or seal of the person or his representative is affixed (Article 358 of the Civil Procedure Act, the seal of the person who prepared the letter of resignation is affixed, and the contents of the document are written in blank and supplemented by a person who is not the person who prepared the letter of resignation, the person who asserts that the document was duly formed shall be entitled to have the right delegated by the person who prepared the document.