Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that manufactures and sells electrical and electronic semiconductor parts, and the Defendant was a person who served as an internal director of the Plaintiff company from the time of incorporation of the Plaintiff company until January 2016.

B. The Defendant, prior to the establishment of the Plaintiff Company, operated the “C” of the same type of private business as the Plaintiff Company. The Defendant invested 70% of the Plaintiff Company’s total stocks by investing the Plaintiff Company’s business in “C” and owned the cash of KRW 30 million with KRW 30 million and owned the remainder of 30% of the shares. The Plaintiff Company was established on November 7, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Although the Defendant, while establishing the Plaintiff Company, transferred all the business of the Plaintiff Company and its business objective identical to that of the Plaintiff Company, it worked as an internal director of the Plaintiff Company, while serving for the Plaintiff Company as an intra-corporate director by 2012, the Defendant made a separate sales while operating the Plaintiff Company.

① This constitutes a violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business by a transferor of a business under Article 41 of the Commercial Act, or a violation of the agreement to discontinue the “C” established between the shareholders of the Plaintiff company, and ② a violation of the duty of prohibition of competitive business by a director under Article 397(1) of the Commercial Act or a violation of the duty of prohibition of diversion of the company opportunity by a director under Article 397-2(1)2 of the Commercial Act, and thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate

B. In addition, the Defendant did not deposit the provisional money into the Plaintiff Company’s account by taking advantage of the representative status of the Plaintiff Company, but did not commit embezzlement or breach of trust by arbitrarily manipulating the account books as if it deposited the provisional money into the president of each account book, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff Company at least KRW 16.2 million.

C. The Plaintiff Company is a part of the damages suffered by the Plaintiff Company due to the Defendant’s above act, which is the first 50 million won and damages for delay.