1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. The court of first instance accepted part of the reasonable amount of damages among the claims for damages caused by dismissal without justifiable grounds, and rejected the part of the amount of damages equivalent to retirement allowances, and accepted the claim for unpaid remuneration during the period of △△ Director’s employment.

Accordingly, since only the defendant appealed against the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the claim for damages equivalent to retirement allowances among the claims for damages due to dismissal of the plaintiff without justifiable grounds is not included

2. Basic facts

A. From April 13, 2010, the Plaintiff was in office as an internal director of the Defendant, who is a stock company that runs the manufacturing wholesale and retail business of clothing, and was appointed as the Defendant’s representative director on January 20, 2012.

B. Article 35 of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation stipulates that the term of office of a director shall be three years after the Plaintiff’s taking office. However, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff as a director on August 16, 201, with the consent of the Plaintiff’s parent company’s in-house director, a single shareholder holding 100% of the Defendant’s shares on August 16, 2012 (the trade name of the company was changed to D, March 25, 2011; the said trade name was changed to C again on March 28, 2012; and the said trade name was changed to E on March 29, 2013; hereinafter “instant complete parent company”); and with the written consent of the instant parent company, the Defendant dismissed the Plaintiff as a director on the ground of dismissal.

C. However, Article 38(1) of the Defendant’s articles of incorporation provides that “The remuneration of directors shall be determined by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.”

On October 30, 2012, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the amount of damages equivalent to the remuneration due to dismissal without justifiable grounds.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Eul evidence 20, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. Claims for damages due to dismissal without justifiable grounds;

(a)a party’s assertion 1.