1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On November 3, 2011, the Plaintiff was appointed as the Defendant’s auditor.

(2) According to the Defendant’s articles of incorporation, the term of office of an auditor shall be until the closing of a general shareholders’ meeting with respect to the last period for the settlement of accounts within three years after his/her appointment. A bill to determine the auditor’s remuneration shall be presented and resolved separately from the proposal for the determination of the directors’ remuneration. The auditor’s remuneration shall be determined by the resolution of the general shareholders’ meeting, and the auditor’s payment of the auditor’s retirement allowance shall be based on the provision for the payment

The defendant is a stock company with the purpose of manufacturing and selling various automobile parts.

B. According to the Plaintiff’s audit duties and audit duties of the Defendant, an auditor shall perform the company’s business and audit business, and shall not divulge or misappropriate any confidential information that he/she has learned in the course of performing his/her duties without justifiable grounds. On the other hand, when he/she discovers a risk of considerable damage to the company,

C. On July 10, 2012, at the general meeting of shareholders of the Defendant’s July 10, 2012, the Plaintiff dismissed the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff’s dismissal 1) and caused the Plaintiff to engage in audit activities on the ground that it was not based on the representative director C, thereby failing to perform the practical audit. The Plaintiff, as the auditor, was under the authority to investigate the company’s business, and caused confusion to the company by conducting a monthly check, such as investigating the other shareholders and stock public sale, and requesting the data, despite the right to investigate the company’s business. (2) The Plaintiff’s statement of the Plaintiff’s opinion was entrusted with the audit system on November 201, 201. Around March 2012, 2012, the Plaintiff verified that the Plaintiff was under the authority to investigate the company’s business.

In order to understand the interests and contents of the company, D directors who know the legal relations are appointed as an audit assistant.

The new work is properly identified.