The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning for this part is that the court’s reasoning is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 6th to 12 second to 4th). Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The gist of the parties’ assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s retirement allowance in the instant case was legally enacted and amended in accordance with the delegation of the Plaintiff’s articles of incorporation (hereinafter “instant provision on the payment of retirement allowances for officers”)

(B) As the payment was made to B under Article 44(4)1 and (5) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, the full amount should be included in deductible expenses for the business year 2011 pursuant to Article 44(4)1 and (5) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act. (2) Defendant A) The portion exceeding the amount calculated pursuant to Article 44(4)2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act among the retirement allowances in this case cannot be included in deductible expenses for the purpose of distributing the corporation’s funds to a specific executive.

(b) Entry in the attached Form of relevant statutes;

C. In the case of a so-called one company, the company established after its incorporation, as to whether there was a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders on the amendment of the regulations on payment of retirement allowances for officers of this case, if the shareholder attends the general meeting of shareholders as the sole shareholder, the company shall be established as the general meeting of shareholders.