1. At a special general meeting of shareholders held by the Defendant on November 23, 2016, C and D shall be selected as directors and appointed as auditors.

1. Basic facts

A. B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) is a company aimed at manufacturing secondary concrete products. On April 5, 2017, the Suwon District Court rendered a decision to commence the rehabilitation procedure for the instant company on April 5, 2017 (Uwon District Court 2016 Gohap1054), but the Defendant, the representative director of which, as a legal administrator, did not make a separate decision to appoint a custodian.

B. The Plaintiff held short-term loans and 20,000 shares out of 130,00 shares of the instant company against the instant company.

C. On November 23, 2016, the instant company held a special general meeting of shareholders on November 23, 2016 to appoint E as internal directors, D, and auditor, respectively, and resolved on a proposal to dismiss F and G from outside directors.

(hereinafter “Resolution of the Provisional General Meeting of Shareholders of this case”). . [Grounds for recognition] . (No dispute exists, entry in Gap’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul’s Evidence Nos. 1, 5, and 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s resolution of the provisional shareholders’ meeting of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) On November 4, 2016, the extraordinary general meeting of shareholders and the board of directors, as a result, H became the representative director.

Nevertheless, I, the former representative director who is dismissed, notified the convocation of the special shareholders' meeting on November 8, 2016.

② A, D, and I participated in the resolution at the special shareholders’ meeting of the instant case. C except I, and D participated in the resolution, which is not a shareholder of the instant company.

③ C, D, and I closed entrances, and obstructed shareholders who oppose the resolution from the position of the general meeting of shareholders, thereby significantly unfair proceedings.

B. According to the evidence Nos. 1, 6, 7, 15, 16, and 17 as to whether the instant company is a non-authorized person, the instant company held a temporary general meeting of shareholders on October 26, 2016 and resolved to resign from office directors and appoint H, L, D, M, and C as an intra-company director. The board of directors on the same day is H.