1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The Defendant’s dismissal of inside directors A from among the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders on September 12, 2018.

Facts of recognition

On September 7, 2010, the Defendant owned 100,000 shares issued by each company established for the purpose of wholesale and retail distribution of semiconductor and electronic equipment, and 27,000 shares issued by each of them around August 2018, the Plaintiff, a representative director, owned c, D, 41,50 shares owned by each of them.

On August 2, 2018, the defendant's representative director C and D notified the defendant's temporary general meeting of shareholders to dismiss the plaintiff on September 2, 2018, and on September 2, 2018, a general meeting of shareholders was held at the meeting room of Young-gu E and Fdong 13th (hereinafter "instant general meeting of shareholders") on September 2, 2018.

On September 12, 2018, the Plaintiff attended the general meeting of shareholders of the instant case with H and I attorney-at-law belonging to G law firm G, and expressed his intent to exercise only the authority over 500 shares out of his own shares, and the remaining 41,00 shares submitted a power of delegation stating the purport of delegation to “Law Firm G, Attorneys H and I”.

In addition, since the representative of the law firm G did not mislead the representative of the law firm G, it was required to accept the letter of designation of the attorney or the power of attorney-at-law.

Next, it is problematic that I did not confirm whether I is a member attorney of G or a member attorney of G.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff revised the power of delegation to the effect that all of his/her own shares should be delegated to law firm G Attorney H, and left the general meeting of shareholders of this case.

Since then, the Speaker declared the opening of the meeting.

The Defendant asserted that there is a defect in the delegation of the Plaintiff’s voting rights at the general meeting of shareholders, and declared that there is no voting right for all the Plaintiff’s 41,500 shares, and passed a resolution to dismiss the Plaintiff from the director with the consent of 5,00 shares with remaining voting rights.

(hereinafter “instant resolution”).