1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

(1)in the vicinity of the State;

1. The reasons why this court shall explain this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. 1) As the Plaintiff resigned from office as a director of the Defendant Corporation, the Plaintiff’s resolution by the board of directors (hereinafter “the resolution by the board of directors of this case”) dated April 8, 2009 by the Defendant Corporation.

(2) The amount of contribution of a social welfare foundation cannot exceed 1/5 of the current number of directors of the pertinent social welfare foundation in the composition of the board of directors of the relevant social welfare foundation. Since the Plaintiff is the contributor of the Defendant foundation, it is extremely inappropriate to perform the duties of the Defendant foundation.

Therefore, there is no interest in seeking confirmation of the absence or invalidity of the board of directors resolution of this case.

B. 1) Determination 1) Lawsuits for confirmation of existence of the board of directors’ resolution or for confirmation of invalidity on the standing to be a party falls under ordinary litigation for confirmation, and any person who has an interest in confirmation in ordinary litigation for confirmation shall have standing to sue. In the absence of appointment of a successor director or appointment of a successor director, if the number of other directors whose term of office expires because the appointment is null and void and the appointment of a successor director cannot be carried out normal corporate activities, barring special circumstances where it is deemed that the former director whose term of office expires is inappropriate to carry out corporate activities, the former director may perform the former duties until he is appointed, and the former director who can perform the former duties as part of his duties has a legal interest in seeking confirmation of invalidity of a resolution of replacement of a director by asserting the defects of the resolution of the board of directors’ resolution as part of his duties (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da2263, Apr. 26, 2002); according to recognized facts, the Plaintiff appears at the board of directors on June 23, 2006.