1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,016,470 as well as 5% per annum from April 7, 2016 to May 16, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

1. On April 2, 2013, the Plaintiff asserted that, while serving as the Defendant’s joint representative director, the Plaintiff retired from office on April 2, 2013, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 3,847,400, which was not paid by the Defendant on March 3, 2013.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statement of evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 9, the Plaintiff was appointed as a co-representative of the Defendant on March 31, 2005, and was retired on April 2, 2013, and the Plaintiff’s monthly remuneration on March 2, 2013, which was immediately before the Plaintiff’s retirement, is KRW 5,700,000, and the amount of the Plaintiff’s monthly remuneration on March 2, 2013, which was deducted from the Party A’s root, resident tax, health insurance, national pension, year-end settlement, etc., can be recognized as constituting 3,847,40, and barring any special circumstances, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 3,847,40,00 for the monthly remuneration on March

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. Article 388 of the Commercial Act provides that “The remuneration for directors shall be determined by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders if the amount of remuneration is not determined by the articles of incorporation.” Article 36(1) of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides that “The remuneration for executive officers shall be determined by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.” Since the Defendant’s general meeting of shareholders held on March 27, 2014 decided that the remuneration for executive officers shall not be paid on March 2013, the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff is not obligated to pay remuneration for the portion of March 2013. As such, in full view of the purport of the argument in each statement in evidence Nos. 10, 12, 2 and 3, the Defendant appears to have paid the remuneration for executive officers on March 27, 2009 based on the same annual basis since the enforcement of the remuneration for executive officers at the general meeting of shareholders on March 27, 2009, even if the Plaintiff’s general meeting of shareholders held the right to claim remuneration after March 31, 2013.