beta
(영문) 청주지방법원충주지원 2019.03.21 2018가합6020

이사변경등기 청구의 소

Text

1. All of the instant lawsuits are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff, while holding office as the Defendant’s intra-company director, resigned on November 21, 2017 or as a preliminary one, expressed his intention of resignation by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint, and sought the instant lawsuit against the Defendant to implement the procedure for registering the resignation of director with respect to himself and appoint a person to perform the duties of director on behalf of himself.

First of all, among the lawsuit in this case, the case seeking the appointment of a person who performs the duties of a director on behalf of the plaintiff is a non-contentious case as stipulated in Article 72(1) of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act, since the case seeking the appointment of a person who performs the duties of a director on behalf of the plaintiff is a non-contentious case as stipulated in Article 386(2) of

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit is unlawful without examining any further.

Next, I examine the part of the instant lawsuit seeking the implementation of the registration procedure for the resignation of director with respect to the Plaintiff.

The facts that the Plaintiff, C, and D were registered as the Defendant’s inside director, and the Defendant’s capital, from November 21, 2017 to November 201, 2017, were continuously 5,816,665,000 won or above from November 21, 2017, or from the time of this decision, can be recognized by this court or by the records.

However, in accordance with Article 383 (1) of the Commercial Act, three or more directors shall be appointed (in the case of the defendant, since the total amount of capital is at least one billion won, there is no room to apply exceptions to the proviso to the same paragraph). Even if the plaintiff resigned from the defendant's position as the defendant's inside director as alleged by the plaintiff, the plaintiff has the rights and duties of directors pursuant to Article 386 (1) of the Commercial Act until the new appointed director takes office, and in this case, only the registration of resignation of retired director can be separately