1.The judgment of the first instance, including a claim added and expanded in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Defendant’s status as the party concerned was established as a company with less than one billion won in total amount of capital for the purpose of manufacturing and selling electrical, electronic, broadcasting, and telecommunications products and medical device products, and its representative is C, and the Plaintiff is an executive director after joining the Defendant on December 1, 2000, who takes charge of the Defendant’s accounting and tax affairs as an executive director. 2) Since the Plaintiff was appointed as the Defendant’s registered director on December 6, 200, the Plaintiff was reappointed for 2003, 2006, and 2009, respectively, since the Plaintiff was appointed as the Defendant’s registered director on December 6, 200, and was reappointed at a regular general shareholders’ meeting held on March 28, 2010 at the same time as other executive officers for the unification of the term of office.

B. On December 27, 2010, the Defendant’s director C and the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s director, held a board of directors meeting on December 27, 2010 and resolved to the effect that “on the basis of the provisions of the retirement allowances for officers enacted as of January 7, 200 in accordance with the Defendant’s Articles of incorporation and the aforementioned provisions, a payment of KRW 478,313,00 to the Plaintiff’s interim amount of retirement pay, which entered on December 1, 2000 and served for ten years, was made.” Accordingly, the Plaintiff received KRW 478,313,00 as the interim amount of retirement pay from the Defendant on December 31, 2010 (hereinafter “instant interim amount of retirement pay”).

(2) On the other hand, on January 4, 2011, the Plaintiff received respectively the minutes of the board of directors’ meeting as of January 7, 2003, 201, as of December 27, 2011, with the purport that “The Plaintiff enacted a provision on retirement allowances for executive officers with the consent of two shareholders (39,520 shares) present among three shareholders (40,000 shares) from among three shareholders (3 shareholders) by a law firm citizens, etc., and on the same day, as of December 27, 2010, the minutes of the board of directors’ meeting as of December 38, 201, respectively.

C. On January 2, 2013, before the Plaintiff’s term of office expires, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff to dismiss the Plaintiff from office.

(hereinafter “instant dismissal”) D.

The defendant's articles of incorporation and the rules on retirement allowances for executives related to the defendant's articles of incorporation and the rules on retirement allowances for executives (hereinafter "the rules of this case").