회사에 관한 소송
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The parties’ assertion and the key issue of this case are that the Defendants (appointed parties) and the designated parties (hereinafter referred to as “the Defendant”) expressed their intent to oppose the transfer of real estate owned by the Plaintiff, and exercise appraisal rights to all common shares owned by the Defendants. Thus, even if they are not the Plaintiff’s shareholders, the Defendants are asserting that they are shareholders, such as continuing to file a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, and thus, the Plaintiff is asserting that they are not the Plaintiff’s shareholders.
As to this, the Defendants did not receive the purchase price of the shares according to the appraisal right, the Defendants asserted that they were the Plaintiff’s shareholders.
The main issue of the instant case is whether the Defendants, after exercising appraisal rights, have not yet received the purchase price of shares, are recognized as shareholders.
2. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company mainly engaged in the manufacture of concrete mixtures and wholesale and retail business. Defendant B owns 100,000 shares of the Plaintiff, Defendant C owns 20,000 shares, and Defendant D owns 40,00 shares.
B. On December 4, 2015, the Plaintiff was planned to transfer the Plaintiff’s site and factory facilities, etc. to the shareholders of the Plaintiff on a plan to renounce the manufacturing business and convert the Plaintiff into a sales corporation. On December 18, 2015, the Plaintiff sent a notice to convene a temporary general meeting of shareholders stating that the said real estate will be transferred as an agenda item.
C. On December 15, 2015, the Defendants sent a content-certified mail against the Plaintiff. D.
On December 18, 2015, the Plaintiff’s temporary shareholders’ meeting was held as an agenda for the transfer of real estate, including the Plaintiff’s land and factory facilities, and the shareholders holding more than 2/3 of the Plaintiff’s total issued shares at the above temporary shareholders’ meeting was approved by the agreement of the above agenda.
E. The Defendants are the Plaintiff on December 23, 2015.