Applicant 1 and one other (Law Firm Won, Attorneys Park Sang-woo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Ulsan City Park (Attorney Park Young-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

It shall be permitted to convene a temporary directors meeting of the principal of the case with the purpose of meeting the matters stated in the attached Form.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

In full view of the records and the overall purport of the examination of the case, the following facts are substantiated.

A. The principal of the case is an incorporated foundation established on April 7, 2003 for the purpose of the establishment and operation of private charnel houses.

B. On December 4, 2015, the applicant 1 was appointed as a director of the principal of each case on December 11, 2015, and the applicant 2 was appointed as a director of each case on December 11, 2015, and Nonparty 1 (the applicant 2 was registered on February 18, 2016, and the remainder was registered on each of the above appointment days), Nonparty 2 was appointed as a director of the principal of the case on June 1, 2016, respectively (the applicant 2 was registered on each of the above appointment days), and only Nonparty 1 was the representative of the principal of the case.

C. Of the articles of incorporation of the principal of this case, the provisions pertaining to this case, including resolution and holding, are as follows.

Article 26 (Matters to be Resolved by the Board of Directors) (1) The board of directors referred to in the main sentence of Article 26 (Matters to be Resolved by the Board of Directors) shall deliberate and resolve on the following matters. 2) The regular board of directors shall be held in January each year, and the temporary board of directors shall be convened when the representative director deems it necessary or at least one-third of the registered directors make a written request, and when the auditor makes a joint signature.

D. On November 29, 2016, 201, 2017, February 17, 2017, and June 2, 2017, the applicants sent a letter of request for a temporary board meeting, stating the attached items, to 1 other than the directors having the power of representation, by content-certified mail. However, the non-applicant 1 did not hold a temporary board meeting of the principal of the case until now.

2. Determination

A. Determination as to the grounds for the application

In addition, in full view of the applicant’s written request for convening a temporary board of directors sent by content-certified mail to the applicants at least 1/3 of the registered directors of the principal of the case, barring any special circumstance, it is presumed that the written request for convening a temporary board of directors sent by content-certified mail was sent to the non-applicant 1 at that time. In addition, the applicant’s written request for convening a temporary board of directors on November 29, 2016 was served to the non-applicant 1 on the following day, and the applicant’s written request for convening a temporary board of directors on February 17, 2017 is proved to have

On the other hand, it is reasonable to permit the convening of a temporary board of directors of the principal of the case with the purpose of meeting the applicant, except in extenuating circumstances, inasmuch as the applicant was served with a written request for convening a temporary board of directors of the applicant and did not comply with it within 14 days.

B. Judgment on the argument of the principal of the case

1) The assertion

The corporate register of the principal of the case is recorded as the appointment of the board of directors on December 11, 2015 by the applicant 2 to the board of directors, but the above board of directors was not held. Accordingly, the applicant 2 is not a director of the principal of the case, and the applicant 2's temporary board of directors is not a director of the principal of the case, and the request for the convocation of the board of directors is below the number of

2) Determination

If a company is registered as a director or auditor on the corporate register, it shall be presumed that the company is a legitimate director or auditor appointed by a legitimate procedure unless there are special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 91Da4409 delivered on December 27, 191, etc.).

As long as the applicant 2 was registered as a director in the corporate register of the principal of the case as above, the applicant 2 is presumed to be a director of the principal of the case appointed by the due process, and the data submitted by the principal of the case alone are insufficient to deem that the above presumption was reversed, and there is no other evidence to deem that the above presumption was reversed.

Therefore, we cannot accept the case principal's argument.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the application of this case shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judges Lee Jae-chul (Presiding Judge)