1. The part requesting the dismissal of the representative director among the lawsuits in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant shall be appointed as C’s director.

1. Of the lawsuit in this case, the part concerning the request for dismissal of the representative director is examined ex officio, and the part concerning the request for dismissal of the defendant from the office of representative director C among the lawsuit in this case constitutes an action for formation aimed at forming an alteration of existing legal relations, and the lawsuit for formation is instituted only where the law expressly prescribes.

However, Article 385 (2) of the Commercial Act only provides for the request for dismissal of a director, and there is no other legal provision concerning the dismissal of a representative director.

In addition, since the representative director is based on the premise that he/she is a director, he/she can deprive him/her of his/her status through a lawsuit claiming dismissal of directors, and thus, he/she has no interest in claiming dismissal of the representative director.

Therefore, the part that seeks to dismiss the defendant from the office of representative director C among the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no legal basis, and there is no benefit of lawsuit.

2. Determination on the request for removal of directors

(a)be as shown in the attachment of the claim;

(b) Articles 208 (3) 1 and 257 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act of the applicable provisions of Acts;

3. In conclusion, the part concerning the request for dismissal of the representative director among the lawsuits in this case is unlawful and dismissed, and the remaining claims of the plaintiff are accepted for the reasons of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.