이사변경등기
1. The part concerning the preliminary claim in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit shall be dismissed in this part; and
2. The total amount of the litigation;
In the first instance court, the plaintiff filed a claim for confirmation of the invalidity of the resolution to appoint directors from D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L at the defendant's extraordinary general meeting on May 9, 2013. The first instance court dismissed the primary claim and accepted the preliminary claim.
Since only the defendant appealed, the object of the trial in our court is limited to the conjunctive claim.
In accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the part of "1. Basic Facts", "2. Judgment on this Safety Defense" and "3. Judgment on the plaintiff's primary claim shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The Defendant asserted the legitimacy of the conjunctive claim portion, the Defendant retired all the directors appointed at the extraordinary general meeting of May 9, 2013, and passed a resolution to appoint a new director at the general meeting of February 26, 2016, and completed the registration of change of director. As such, the Plaintiff’s conjunctive claim portion seeking confirmation of invalidity of the resolution of the general meeting of May 9, 2013 is alleged to have no benefit of confirmation. The Plaintiff’s minutes of the general meeting are likely to have been falsely prepared, and a new director was appointed at the general meeting of February 26, 2016.
Even if the plaintiff was ordered by the resolution of the board of directors on August 2, 2015 by those who are not qualified as directors, the plaintiff asserts that there is a benefit of confirmation because even previous legal relations affect the legal relations of the plaintiff at present.
Judgment
In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity or non-existence of a resolution to appoint an executive officer of a certain organization on the ground that there is a defect in the resolution to appoint the executive officer of a certain organization, if the person appointed by the resolution was no longer at the position of the executive officer due to the expiration of the term of office or resignation, and then a new executive officer was appointed lawfully, the original