1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The basic facts are as follows: (a) the Plaintiff was in the position of the head of the headquarters at the Defendant Company from March 1, 2005 to November 30, 2012; (b) around October 19, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant’s president C, Auditor D (the current representative director of the Defendant), E, the vice president, and F (D) in order of interest on loans, essential expenses, salaries, salaries, principal of loans, and incentives; (c) the benefits shall be paid in the order of interest on loans, essential expenses, salaries, principal of loans, and incentives; and (d) the fact that “if the Defendant is normalization, the Plaintiff was paid the difference between the normal benefits and the temporary benefits (the normal benefits of KRW 200,000 by the end of the normalization) do not conflict between the parties; or (d) the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 2.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Of the terms and conditions of Plaintiff 1’s agreement, when the Defendant was “normal”, the Defendant refers to the situation in which the Defendant receives or redeems service costs and loans from a partnership for maintenance and improvement projects, and the situation in which revenue is possible through other types of business. On the following grounds, the Defendant came to fall under the following: (i) As to the construction of a new building at Pyeongtaek-si (hereinafter “I”).

(A) A business relationship or other similar relationship with I, however, through J of the representative director, 400,363,835 won (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 400,835,000 on June 28, 2013) (i.e., the principal amount of KRW 363,835,00,000 on behalf of the Defendant for business income, and (ii) from I on January 8, 2013; and

1. 9. A total of KRW 193 billion received business income and obtained business income.

② On August 28, 2013, the Defendant prepared KRW 140 million through F, etc. and deposited it into the Korea Forestry Cooperative. On October 4, 2013, the Defendant received KRW 230 million from the said forestry cooperative and received KRW 90 million from the said forestry cooperative, and obtained business income of KRW 90 million.

③ From December 1, 2012 to June 30, 2014, the Defendant’s income after the Plaintiff retired shall be 1,236.