1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. From January 1, 1996, the Plaintiff served as a director at the Defendant Company.

B. On August 2009, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the investigation agency against C, the representative director of the Defendant Company, and filed a complaint with the investigation agency against C. On October 29, 2010, the original district prosecutor’s office charged C without being subject to embezzlement for business purposes.

C. On December 30, 2010, the Defendant Company dismissed the Plaintiff through a temporary general meeting of shareholders, and on January 5, 201, the Plaintiff demanded the settlement of dismissal allowances, measures to receive employment insurance money, retirement allowances, and annual monthly allowances against the Defendant Company.

On January 10, 201, Defendant Company reported the loss of insured status of the employment insurance against the Plaintiff to the Changwon of the Busan Regional Employment and Labor Office (hereinafter “Employment and Labor Office”), and the Employment and Labor Office requested the Plaintiff to submit data, such as social minutes, even if the Plaintiff is not a person eligible for employment insurance.

Accordingly, the defendant company submitted relevant data to the Employment and Labor Agency, and the Employment and Labor Agency reviewed the data, which led the plaintiff to apply for cancellation of the insured status on the ground that the plaintiff is not the employee of the defendant company but the employer.

E. Accordingly, on January 14, 201, the Defendant Company filed an application with the Korea Labor Agency for the cancellation of the acquisition of insured status with respect to the Plaintiff, and the Korea Labor Agency decided to revoke the acquisition of insured status with respect to the Plaintiff on January 20, 2011.

F. On February 18, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant Company against the Changwon District Court for the payment of retirement allowance and unpaid annual monthly allowance, and the said court rendered a judgment citing the Plaintiff’s claim on the premise that the Plaintiff constitutes the employee of the Defendant Company.

[C] The defendant company appealed to the above court, and the court of appeal partially accepted the plaintiff's claim. The court of appeal is a judgment citing the plaintiff's claim.