명의개서 청구의 소
1. Of the plaintiffs' lawsuits, the part of the plaintiffs' claims against Defendant D is dismissed.
2. Plaintiffs Co., Ltd.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant Company is a company established for the purpose of manufacturing the freezing machinery.
B. Details of the change in shares of the Defendant Company are as follows.
No. 15,000 capital increase on December 15, 2018; 20,000 capital increase on December 15, 2018; 20,000 20,00 20,000 32,0002 E 2,000 22,000 9,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 3 F 1,800 3 F 1,800 1,500 1,500 00 1,500 1,500,500 1,500 1,500,500 1,500 1,500, 5000 Ha,500 Ha,500 1,500 1,500 80,5010,010,010
C. On March 14, 2018, Plaintiff B entered into a sales contract with Plaintiff A to purchase KRW 270,000 shares issued by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant shares”) for KRW 12,00,000,000. Plaintiff B requested transfer of ownership against Defendant Company on or around March 27, 2018, but rejected Plaintiff B’s transfer of ownership.
[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 13 (including each number), Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment on the parties' arguments
A. Plaintiff A is the shareholder of the instant shares 12,00 shares (24%) and Plaintiff B purchased the instant shares from Plaintiff A on March 14, 2018. However, as the Defendant Company unfairly rejected Plaintiff B’s transfer request, and at its discretion arbitrarily transferred the ownership of the instant shares to Defendant D, the Defendant Company sought the cancellation of the transfer of the instant shares and the implementation of the transfer of the ownership procedure as stated in the purport of the claim. 2) Of the instant lawsuit by the Defendants, the part of the claim against Defendant D in the instant lawsuit is unlawful as the claim against a person who is not obligated to implement the transfer of ownership procedure.
The instant shares are shares owned by Defendant D, since Defendant D’s title trust was held by the Plaintiff, but the title trust was terminated, and the Plaintiff B’s assertion that Defendant D acquired the instant shares from Plaintiff A and the Plaintiff does not constitute a substantial shareholder.
Plaintiff
A is merely the transferor of the instant shares.