The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul Central District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. If a judgment revoking the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders on the appointment of directors becomes final and conclusive, the representative director selected by the board of directors composed of the directors appointed by the resolution shall lose his qualification retroactively (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da19797, Feb. 27, 2004, etc.). In the same case, if a judgment revoking the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders on the dismissal of directors becomes final and conclusive, the director dismissed by the resolution shall reinstate

2. The reasoning of the lower judgment and the record reveal the following facts.

A. The Defendant, who was the representative director of B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”), was dismissed by a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders held on August 9, 2012. The same general meeting of shareholders was newly appointed as a director by C, etc., and the newly appointed directors were appointed as the representative director at the board of directors on the same day.

B. On April 4, 2016, the Daejeon High Court sentenced the dismissal of the above directors and the revocation of the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders for the appointment of directors. The above judgment became final and conclusive around July 14, 2016.

3. Examining the foregoing facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, insofar as the judgment revoking the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders held on August 9, 2012 becomes final and conclusive, the Defendant, who was dismissed in the resolution of the said general meeting of shareholders, reinstates his/her qualification as the representative director B retroactively. As such, the Defendant prepared an application for registration of change of a stock company indicating himself/herself as the representative director B on November 201, and submitted it to the Daejeon District Court’s registration and the public official around December 4, 2012, does not constitute the crime of preparing a false qualification document and the crime of gambling

must be viewed.

4. The lower court found all of the facts charged in this case guilty on the grounds stated in its reasoning, such as that the revocation judgment is not uniformly retroactively retroactive to a case where the revocation judgment of the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders becomes final and conclusive. In so determining, the lower court is with the validity of the revocation judgment of the resolution of the general