주식양도 및 약정금 청구의 소
The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.
after the filing of an appeal.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition as described in paragraph (2) below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Accordingly, according to the judgment of the court of first instance No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance that is dismissed or added (except for the marks, hereinafter the same shall apply), the defendant turns "in around the defendant according to the judgment of the court of first instance as "the defendant".
The following shall be added to the fourth 4th 10th 2nd 10th 10th 2nd 3th 3th 20
“The parties to the agreement on the transfer of the instant shares, even if the Defendant is not the Defendant G, the Defendant signed the certificate of stock custody and jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation regarding the agreement on the transfer of the instant shares. As such, the Defendant, as the joint and several surety of G, has the obligation to transfer the instant common shares to the Plaintiff in the same manner as the purport of the claim is stated
In the first instance judgment, 5 pages 8 through 12 of the first instance judgment are as follows.
“2) In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged earlier, the agreement on the transfer of the instant shares was duly formed in light of the aforementioned facts and the overall purport of the pleadings, as a whole, on the respective descriptions of Gap’s facts, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 15, and Eul’s evidence No. 10-10
It is difficult to see that even if the agreement on the transfer of the instant shares is established, it is difficult to see the party to the contract as the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the Defendant jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation regarding the agreement on the transfer
As it is difficult to see, the evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the above assertion, and there is no other evidence to prove it otherwise.
Therefore, the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims on different premise are without merit.
The following shall be added to the 5th judgment of the first instance. 21th judgment of the first instance.
As alleged by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the share transfer agreement.