1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the judgment as described in paragraph (2) below. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) In a case where a person who held total shares of the Defendant Company as the sole shareholder of the Plaintiff Company as the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant Company, it is apparent that the shareholder would have been present at the general shareholders’ meeting as the sole shareholder and that it would be resolved according to the intent of the shareholders. As such, at the time of the formation of the instant agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant C held 50% of the shares of the Defendant Company, and thus, the attendance at the Plaintiff and the Defendant C would have reached a general shareholders’ meeting and would have passed a resolution as to the above dividends without a separate procedure, since the Plaintiff and the Defendant C agreed to pay dividends for the net income of the Defendant Company for the year 2013 under the instant agreement, it shall be deemed that there was a resolution of the general shareholders’ meeting as to the above dividends without the need to convene a separate procedure. Therefore, even if Defendant C’s assertion against the Plaintiff as to the amount equivalent to the Plaintiff’s share ratio in the year 2013 net income of the Defendant Company, Defendant C cannot be deemed liable for damages to the Plaintiff’s share ratio.