1. The plaintiff's primary action is dismissed as a claim for nullification of dismissal.

2. The plaintiff's remaining primary claims and the plaintiff's main claims.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a juristic person operating the business of manufacturing electric machinery, etc., and the Plaintiff was employed as a director at the Defendant company around December 2002 and became a representative director on October 18, 2007 as the Defendant’s owner of business start-up (hereinafter “the deceased”) and was dismissed by the board of directors on February 6, 2013.

B. On January 31, 2013, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the convocation of the board of directors on February 6, 2013 to the effect that the Plaintiff would have attended the board of directors consisting of “the case of convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders, the case of dismissing A representative director,” and the case of dismissing A representative director. On February 6, 2013, the Defendant opened the board of directors and convened a resolution to convene a temporary general meeting to dismiss the Plaintiff’s representative director on February 27, 2013 with the consent of all the members present at the board of directors (hereinafter “the resolution of dismissal of the board of directors”) with the consent of the above D, E, and F except the Plaintiff. ② The Plaintiff’s remarks that the Plaintiff would have damaged the image of the company, lost authority as its officers, lost authority as its officers, and there is almost no business performance, etc., and thus, the representative director’s qualification as a representative director is insufficient.

(2) On February 27, 2013, the Defendant’s representative director D, pursuant to the resolution of the board of directors in this case, delegated the voting rights to four of the five shareholders (54,500 shares of the shareholders present among the total number of 60,000 shares issued, 54,50 shares of the number of shareholders present at the meeting, shareholders F, and G without direct attendance, and Article 386(3) of the Commercial Act provides that “the shareholder may have a proxy exercise the voting rights by proxy. In this case, the proxy shall submit a document proving the power of representation to the general meeting, which allows the proxy to exercise the voting rights by proxy.”