주주총회결의 무효확인
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. We examine the legality of the instant lawsuit ex officio.
According to the records, C has taken office as a representative director and an intra-company director on November 9, 2012 and completed registration of his/her taking office on the same day. On November 3, 2014, C has completed registration of his/her resignation on November 7, 2014, and D has completed registration of his/her taking office on the same day as the Defendant’s intra-company director on September 19, 2012, and completed registration of his/her taking office on the same day.
Therefore, the Plaintiff’s seeking confirmation of invalidity of each resolution of the provisional shareholders’ meeting stated in the purport of the claim is seeking confirmation of the past legal relationship or relationship of rights and interests.
Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.
2. The plaintiff asserts that the costs of the lawsuit in this case should be borne by the defendant, at least considering that the defendant's representative director and internal director at the time when the judgment of the court of first instance was filed.
Any objection against a judgment on the costs of lawsuit shall be permitted only where the whole or part of an appeal against the judgment on the merits is well-grounded, and it shall not be permitted unless the appeal on the merits is well-grounded.
(See Supreme Court Decision 94Hu1091 delivered on March 10, 1995, Supreme Court Decision 95Da38233 delivered on January 23, 1996, Supreme Court Decision 98Da22048 delivered on September 8, 1998). Thus, as long as the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment on the merits in the first instance is without merit, the plaintiff's assertion that the judgment on the merits was erroneous in the judgment on the costs of lawsuit in the first instance judgment cannot be accepted, and the costs of appeal cannot be borne by the defendant.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.
3. The decision of the court of first instance is justifiable in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.