logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.08.09 2017가단546572
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 21, 2012, the Defendant entered into a joint venture shareholder agreement with C as part of the Defendant’s implementation of an emergency management plan for normalization (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

B. The Plaintiff was dispatched from C to work as the Defendant’s auditor pursuant to the instant agreement, and the Defendant paid C the Plaintiff’s remuneration as the service cost.

However, from April 15, 2016, the defendant, who returned the plaintiff from C to C, was required to appoint and pay the auditor directly.

C. Considering that the Defendant is an emergency management situation, the Defendant had the Plaintiff perform the duties of the auditor and the officer in charge of funds, and appointed the Plaintiff as an auditor at a temporary general meeting of shareholders on May 18, 2016, and completed the registration of his/her appointment around that time.

Article 38 of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides, “The remuneration and retirement consolation money of an auditor shall be determined by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.” Article 38(2) of the amended Articles of incorporation as of April 13, 2017 provides, “The payment of the auditor’s retirement allowance shall be made in accordance with the rules on the payment of retirement allowances for executive officers which have undergone a resolution

E. On March 17, 2017, the Defendant passed a resolution to revise the payment rate from one month to one point five months of monthly salary, among the provisions on the payment of retirement allowances for executive officers in a regular society.

F. On April 13, 2017, the Defendant issued a special resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff at a temporary general meeting of shareholders, and the Plaintiff received KRW 4,138,156 as retirement allowance on June 2, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's retirement allowance claim 1 is liable to pay 2,11,843 won of the unpaid retirement allowance, since the defendant paid 6,249,99 won to the plaintiff according to the revised retirement allowance payment provision, only 4,138,156 won.

arrow