제권판결에 대한 불복청구의 소
1. In the case of a request for public summons No. 2015 Chicago863, this Court shall apply to convertible bonds listed in the separate sheet on April 11, 2016.
1. Basic facts
A. On October 16, 2015, the Defendant transferred 51% of the shares E owned by the Defendant to the Intervenor joining the Defendant (mutual stock company D before the change) and agreed to receive 96 copies of convertible bonds (F-G) equivalent to KRW 4.8 billion including convertible bonds listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant convertible bonds”) as the acquisition price.
B. According to the above agreement, the Defendant’s Intervenor 26 copies of convertible bonds (F-H) were the Defendant, and the remainder 70 copies (including I-G and the instant convertible bonds; hereinafter “related convertible bonds”) were the case to J. However, the Defendant promised to encash convertible bonds and return them to the Defendant until the end of December 2015.
C. However, the Defendant demanded the J to return the pertinent convertible bonds by November 13, 2015, and reported that the Seoul Gangnam Police Station lost the convertible bonds on November 27, 2015 when the J refused to return the relevant convertible bonds.
On December 17, 2015, the Defendant applied for a public summons on the ground that the pertinent convertible bonds were lost by Seoul Central District Court 2015KaGong863, and the said court rendered a judgment of nullification on April 11, 2016 (hereinafter “instant judgment of nullification”).
The plaintiff argues that the judgment of this case is null and void because it stated 35 copies of the purchase of the pertinent convertible bonds (I orG) while rendering a judgment of nullification on the pertinent convertible bonds (I orG). However, since the serial numbers of the pertinent convertible bonds are stated in the above judgment of nullification and the report of loss (Evidence 6) is stated not only in the serial numbers of the convertible bonds, but also in the report of loss (Evidence 6) that "I-G of Convertible Bonds I-G", it is determined to be specified to the effect that it should be invalidated on the I-G 70 copies of the
E. The Plaintiff is the holder of the instant convertible bonds, and the Intervenor joining the Defendant on July 2, 2018.