1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s cause of claim is a shareholder who holds 10% of C’s shares, and the Defendant is a inside-house director and a representative director.

Since the Defendant committed an unlawful act related to C’s duties, such as embezzlement, in the course of operating C, a violation of the articles of incorporation, a violation of a contract between shareholders, a proxy contract for fund management, or a violation of a pledge contract, etc., it is clear that the Defendant has committed an unlawful act related to C’s duties such as embezzlement, or a violation of the statutes or the articles of incorporation, which is the reason for dismissal of the director

Nevertheless, since the bill of dismissal of the director against the defendant was rejected at the temporary general meeting of shareholders of C, the plaintiff seeks to dismiss the defendant as the director and the representative director of C by the suit of this case.

2. We examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit ex officio on the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

A. Determination 1 on the part of a claim for removal of a director: (a) where a plaintiff seeking dismissal of a director against the defendant only files a lawsuit against only one of the parties to the company and the director, even if a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the defendant has been rendered, res judicata does not extend to the other parties; and (b) the other party does not have any opportunity to file a lawsuit against the other party; or (c) unreasonable outcomes arise from the other party’s conclusion in the lawsuit that is separate from each other. Ultimately, the lawsuit for removal of a director constitutes an inherent indispensable co-litigation that requires a single final and conclusive judgment against all of the parties to the legal relationship, i.e., the legal relationship between the company and the director and the director., a lawsuit for removal of a director is a lawsuit seeking removal of a director against the defendant who is a director, and Article 385(2) of the Commercial Act violates the relevant statutes or the articles of incorporation.