1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant’s general meeting of shareholders appointed C, D, E, F, G, and H as directors and I as auditors, respectively.

1. Evidence of the following facts does not conflict between the parties, evidence of subparagraph 1, evidence of subparagraph 2-1 through 5 (the evidence of subparagraph 8 shall apply to the evidence of subparagraph 2-5), evidence of subparagraph 3-1 through 4, evidence of subparagraph 5-1, 2, evidence of subparagraph 6-1 through 8, evidence of subparagraph 6-1 through 8, evidence of subparagraphs 7 through 9, evidence of subparagraph 10-1 through 6, evidence of subparagraph 11, evidence of subparagraph 12, evidence of subparagraph 14, evidence of subparagraph 15, evidence of subparagraph 16-2, evidence of subparagraph 1, evidence of subparagraph 2-1 through 5, evidence of subparagraph 3, evidence of subparagraph 7-1 through 3, evidence of subparagraph 4-1 through 9, evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3-4, evidence of subparagraph 1-2, evidence of subparagraph 3, evidence of subparagraph 7-1 through 3, evidence of subparagraph 4-2, evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3-1 through 4, evidence

4.(a)

1) As seen in the foregoing paragraph, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and Eul evidence Nos. 10-5 may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the purport of all pleadings. (a) The status of the plaintiff as a shareholder and representative director of the defendant, who was appointed on February 17, 2010; (b) the plaintiff retired on March 8, 201 after being appointed as the defendant's representative director on March 22, 201; and (c) on August 25, 2011, the total number of shares issued by the defendant was 100,000 shares issued by the defendant on September 16, 201; and (d) the change of the number of shares issued by the plaintiff was made on August 15, 202 to 10,000 shares issued by the defendant on August 15, 201; and (e) the change was made on October 10, 2010, 2010 shares issued by the defendant on October 17, 2010.