주주명의변경등
1. This Court shall exchange each additional claim against Defendant D and H Co., Ltd. and against Defendant E and F.
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cite it as it is in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Determination as to claim for damages against Defendant D, E, or F
A. The plaintiffs asserted 1) Defendant D, E, and F: (a) conspired with each other with the intent to occupy Defendant H; (b) before entering into the instant transfer contract, they explained the plaintiffs’ asset value of Defendant H through Defendant D through Defendant D; (c) have reduced the positive property; (d) have assessed the asset value of Defendant H at least KRW 1,075,924,00 in an exaggerated or false manner in which the assets value is less than KRW 1,075,924,00; and (e) had the plaintiffs enter into a contract to transfer the shares of this case to Defendant F with approximately KRW 350,000,000,00,000, in disregarding the business rights with approximately KRW 94,919,454 in value; and (e) have had the plaintiffs transfer the shares of this case to Defendant D, E, and F to Defendant H by such unlawful act; (e) accordingly, the plaintiffs lost their shareholder status as to Defendant H’s asset value at KRW 2,009,409,405400.
3) Accordingly, Defendant D, E, and F jointly have the obligation to pay the Plaintiff KRW 428,571,428 (i.e., KRW 1,00,00,000 x KRW 3/7), the Plaintiff B, and C respectively (i.e., KRW 1,00,000 x 2/7) and damages for delay thereof (i.e., KRW 1,00,000 x 2/7) and each of them.
A. Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 22, 37, 41, 42, 43, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 28, and 45, the result of the appraiser T in the first instance trial, the result of the inquiry of the appraiser T in the first instance court;