1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the following order for further perusal and copying.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: (a) the part excluded from the subject of the judgment of the court of first instance (the documents and the parts reduced in the trial) and the part excluded from the subject of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except where the "determination on the paper books and documents" is used as follows; (c) therefore, it shall be accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The part written after repair (the determination on the remaining account books and documents in paragraph (5));

A. A shareholder who holds shares equivalent to not less than 3/100 of the total number of issued and outstanding shares in the grounds for the claim regarding the documents listed in the separate sheet Nos. 3 and 4 may request the perusal or copying of the account books and documents in writing stating the grounds for the request. Since the perusal or copying of the account books and documents is a serious reason for the management of the account, it shall be done with caution and at the same time, in order to facilitate judgment on the existence of a duty to access and copy to the other party, and the scope of the account books and documents that should not be permitted.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da137 delivered on December 21, 199, etc.). The documents listed in paragraphs (3) and (4) of the attached Table Nos. 3, i.e., “cash receipt and disbursement book and bill issuance book” are all the books indicating the company’s accounting and financial status, or documents used as a basis for preparing such books, which constitute accounting books and documents stipulated in Article 466 of the Commercial Act. The fact that the Plaintiff owned 50% of the Defendant Company’s shares is a shareholder, as seen earlier. Thus, the Plaintiff constitutes a minority shareholder who can claim perusal and copying of the above books and documents.

In addition, the plaintiff is the representative director of the defendant company through the complaint of this case.