주주지위확인
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. The Defendant is a stock company established on March 23, 2007 for the purpose of collecting aggregate, selling aggregate, etc.
B. The Defendant’s shareholder registry listed C as each shareholder of 151,00 shares issued in the 303,265 shares, D, and E, each of 10,00 shares, and the Plaintiff’s total of 92,165 shares, including 7,165 shares listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant shares”), F as 19,70 shares, and G as 20,40 shares.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a beneficial shareholder who acquired the instant shares from H, I, and J by borrowing the acquisition price for the instant shares from C.
Nevertheless, the head of Jeju Tax Office imposed gift tax on the Plaintiff by deeming that the Plaintiff was the title trust of the instant shares from C, thereby filing a tax appeal.
Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation as a shareholder of the instant shares against the Defendant.
B. We examine ex officio the legality of the instant lawsuit.
A lawsuit for confirmation is recognized as the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment on confirmation of the legal relationship in order to eliminate the present risk or apprehensions that exist in the current rights or legal status (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2003Da55059, Dec. 22, 2005; 2010Da36407, Oct. 14, 2010). As to the instant case, health class and the Defendant’s registry of shareholders had already been registered as the Plaintiff. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff did not have any dispute with the Defendant on the fact that the Plaintiff is a shareholder of the instant shares, and thus, the Plaintiff did not have any interest in seeking confirmation against the Defendant as the Plaintiff.
Furthermore, regarding the taxation disposition against the Plaintiff, it is on the ground that the Plaintiff is a beneficial shareholder, not a trustee of title with respect to the instant shares.