beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 22,258,064 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from February 12, 2016 to July 22, 2016.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 1, 2014, the Plaintiff, as the representative director of the Defendant Company, invested KRW 100 million in the Defendant Company and entered into a business agreement with 20% of the shares of the Defendant Company, and entered into that agreement with the Plaintiff to be appointed as a director of the Defendant Company after performing the obligation of investment.
B. The Plaintiff paid KRW 100 million to C, acquired 20% of the shares issued by the Defendant Company, and was appointed as the Defendant’s director on May 2015, and retired on December 4, 2015.
C. From May 2014 to September 2014, the Defendant Company paid KRW 2,00,000 per month to the Plaintiff as remuneration, and the monthly remuneration was not paid for October 2014. The Defendant Company paid KRW 4,000,000 as remuneration for November 2014 and December 2014, and paid KRW 4,00,000 as remuneration, and the payment was not made for January 2015, and the payment was not made for KRW 2,00,000 as remuneration for February 2, 2015.
(Total Amount paid by the Defendant Company 16,000,000). 【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, and purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that the Defendant Company is obligated to pay KRW 2,50,000 per month to the Plaintiff for the following reasons, and sought payment of KRW 31,828,760, which was unpaid from May 1, 2014 to December 4, 2015, 47,828,760, which was the 19-month period, from May 1, 2014 to December 4, 2015.
1) Defendant Company is obligated to pay remuneration to the Plaintiff, who is a director of Defendant Company. 2) Defendant Company is obligated to pay wages to the Plaintiff, who entered into an employment contract with Defendant Company.
3) The Defendant Company is obligated to pay the agreed amount to the Plaintiff. (B) As to the claim for remuneration as a director, as seen earlier, the Plaintiff was in office as a director of the Defendant Company from May 1, 2014 to December 4, 2015. Therefore, the Defendant Company is subject to a resolution by the articles of incorporation or the general meeting of shareholders of the Defendant Company.