1. The judgment of the first instance is modified upon the claim that was modified by this court as follows.

The defendant is limited to November 4, 2016.

1. The grounds for this part of the underlying facts are as follows, with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, with the exception of adding some content as follows.

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). The following shall be added to the third string of the judgment of the first instance:

After that, on November 5, 2016, the total number of outstanding shares was changed from 60,000 to 200,000 won, and the amount of capital was changed from 300,000 to 1 billion won, respectively, at the defendant's request.

‘The alteration registration' was made on November 7, 2016.

A person shall be appointed.

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. The grounds for this part concerning the standing to be a party are as follows: (a) the “Defendant’s shareholder” in the sixth first part of the judgment of the first instance is used as “Defendant’s shares”; and (b) the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is as follows.

(main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act).

The reasons why this court is stated in this part regarding the exclusion period Do, etc. are as follows, except that the court has used the period from "However," to "V" to "V" to "V" below the sixth of the judgment of the first instance as follows:

(2) Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The Plaintiff shall not file a lawsuit seeking invalidation of the issuance of new shares, but shall obtain confirmation as to the existence of new shares and confirmation as to the absence of the resolution of the board of directors of this case concerning the issuance of new shares as to the issuance of new shares, on the ground that the defect in the resolution of the board of directors of this case concerning the issuance of new shares was extremely serious, and the absence of the resolution of the board of directors of this case concerning the issuance of new shares is confirmed as to the issuance of the above new shares. Thus, the lawsuit of this case shall not be subject to appeal during the period of invalidation of the issuance of new shares (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Meu2316, Jul. 25, 1989; 2017Hun-Ba

C. On November 30, 2017, the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant’s non-committee agreement was breached is 1). The Plaintiff asserted L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”).

30 million won.