(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.11.25 2016나2003995

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.11.25 2016나2003995

해고무효확인

Text

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below shall be cancelled.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for partial revision as follows.

The 3 pages 10 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be amended to "paragraph (c)".

The parts from 8 pages 9 to 3 pages 8 of the first instance judgment shall be amended as follows:

A person shall be appointed.

C. Damages A) The Plaintiff was appointed as a director of D on December 13, 2010. On February 15, 2012, the fact that the Plaintiff was dismissed from office at D’s temporary shareholders’ meeting on February 15, 2012 is as seen earlier. According to the evidence Nos. 6 and No. 2, the term of office of D director shall be three years after his/her inauguration, but if the term of office is terminated before the end of the final general shareholders’ meeting regarding the period for the settlement of accounts during the term of office (Articles of incorporation Article 26), D’s regular shareholders’ meeting is extended until the end of the ordinary shareholders’ meeting (from January 1 of each year to December 31 of the same year), D’s meeting is convened within three months from the date following the end of the business year (Articles of incorporation and 17, Article 36), D’s temporary shareholders’ meeting may seek remuneration of KRW 640,000,000 from the end of 20 months until the expiration of the term of the Plaintiff’s term of office.

B. On February 13, 2009, the defendant was appointed as a inside director of D on December 13, 2010, and later retired on December 13, 2010, again assumed office as an inside director on the same day. Since the term of office of a director appointed as a substitute in the articles of incorporation of D is the remaining term of office of a former director, the term of office of the director appointed as a substitute in the articles of incorporation of D is February 12, 2012, and therefore, the plaintiff suffered from his

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2016.07.14 2015가합23205

-서울고등법원 2018.06.07 2016나2025919

-서울남부지방법원 2013.11.19 2013가합101440

-서울남부지방법원 2018.11.16 2018가합105188

-대법원 2010. 6. 24. 선고 2010다13541 판결