1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the primary and conjunctive claims of Plaintiff B Co., Ltd. shall be dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a stock company that operates solar energy and heat energy system design and manufacturing business. Before the Defendant’s temporary general meeting of shareholders (hereinafter “instant general meeting of shareholders”) on August 9, 2012, the Plaintiff A performed his duties as the Defendant’s representative director and internal director.

B. On June 29, 2012, D, a shareholder of the Defendant Company, filed a request for convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders with the Defendant Company, but the Plaintiff failed to comply with this request, and filed an application for permission to convene a temporary general meeting of shareholders under this Court No. 2012 non-conforming34. This court accepted the above application on July 23, 2012, and approved the convocation of the instant general meeting of shareholders, “in-house directors AE, other non-executive directors, dismissal of auditors, and appointment of ex post facto directors or auditors of the dismissed director” as the subject of the meeting.

C. On July 26, 2012, D decided as follows: (a) shareholders of the Defendant Company, I, E, the Korea Biotechnology Research Institute, and J; (b) “Temporary: 14:00 on August 9, 2012; (c) the meeting room of the Defendant Company, the Daejeon U.S. K U.K.K. 116, 117; and (c) the agenda: each of the above items permitted by the court; and (d) the notice of convening the general meeting of shareholders of this case was issued.”

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 3, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including branch numbers, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the Defendant’s defense on the main claim and conjunctive claim of Plaintiff B among the instant lawsuit

A. On the premise that the Defendant’s main defense prior to the Defendant’s main defense (hereinafter “Plaintiff Company”) is a shareholder who acquired shares of 98,000 shares from L, a shareholder of the Defendant Company, after the shareholders’ general meeting of shareholders of the Defendant Company, the Defendant did not hold shares of the Defendant Company, and therefore, the Defendant could not transfer shares of the Plaintiff Company. Accordingly, the Plaintiff Company, a shareholder of the Defendant Company, was not a party to the lawsuit.