2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. K served as the Plaintiff’s standing director from March 23, 2012.

B. On February 14, 2014, the board of directors of the Plaintiff deliberated on whether the term of office of the standing director is four years, but upon the lapse of two years after the commencement of the term of office, the board of directors decided on whether the remaining term of office is continued in accordance with Article 56(1) of the Articles of Incorporation, which provides that the result of the management evaluation conducted in accordance with the standards for management evaluation shall be determined to continue to maintain the remaining term of office, and even though the K’s evaluation score was 74.52 (B grade and common grade), it decided to keep the remaining term of office

C. Since then, on April 8, 2015, Defendants B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, and J, the Plaintiff’s president of the association, held a temporary directors meeting on April 8, 2015, and deliberated on the removal of K for reasons of insufficient evaluation of the management status of K as of December 2014, when it fails to submit a resignation document by the end of June 2015 (hereinafter “the resolution of the board of directors of this case”). D. The resolution of the board of directors of this case was submitted to the general meeting (hereinafter “the resolution of the board of directors of this case”).

In accordance with the above resolution of the board of directors, on June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff held a temporary board of directors with the attendance of 35 representatives from among 41 representatives, and passed a resolution to dismiss K from the standing director of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant resolution to dismiss”) with the consent of 28 representatives.

E. K filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of a dismissal disposition against the Plaintiff ( Jeju District Court 2015Gahap1181). On May 12, 2016, the said court ordered K to pay the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 71,915,510, including salary, and damages for delay on the ground that the instant dismissal decision is null and void and the Plaintiff is obligated to compensate for damages, on the ground that it is difficult to deem that K had grounds for dismissal stipulated in Article 57 of the Plaintiff’s Articles of incorporation.