1. Revocation of the judgment of the first instance, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed;

2. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is that the part of this Court’s judgment is identical with the part from 2.7 to 3.21, except for the case where the 3rd 20-21 of the first instance judgment is dismissed as follows. Thus, this part of this Court’s judgment is accepted pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

On June 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit claiming that “The Defendant C pretended to pay the share capital subject to criminal punishment pursuant to Article 628(1) of the Commercial Act, which constitutes an unlawful act or a serious violation of the laws and regulations regarding its duties under Article 385(2) of the Commercial Act,” and that the Defendant C was dismissed from office of the Defendant Company’s director.

“”

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. Defendant C’s assertion by the Defendants had resigned from the director of the Defendant Company on October 24, 2014, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

B. We examine the judgment, since the purpose of a lawsuit seeking removal of a director is to resolve the existing delegation relationship between the company and the director, in a lawsuit demanding removal of a director, if a director who is the object of the lawsuit demanding removal resigns while the lawsuit is pending, the interests of the lawsuit would be lost and thus, would be inappropriate (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da5926, Apr. 12, 1996; Supreme Court Decision 95Na4323, Dec. 14, 1995; Supreme Court Decision 95Na4323, Dec. 14, 1995). In this case, if the statement in evidence No. 31, No. 34, which included the purport of the entire argument, shows that Defendant C resigned of the director of the Defendant company on Oct. 24, 2014 while the lawsuit in this case is pending, the lawsuit in this case became unlawful as it

I would like to say.

3. If so, the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair as it is concluded differently, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed as well as the disposition of this case shall be applied Article 99 of the Civil Procedure Act.