(a) Whether a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders exists in cases where the transferee of stocks who fails to comply with the method of legal transfer of registered stocks is a shareholder;

B. Whether seeking the non-existence of a resolution of a general meeting of shareholders by the transferee of shares who did not complete the procedure for transferring shares goes against the principle of no speech and advice

A. The transferee who was not assigned by the method of transfer of registered shares cannot assert that the transfer of shares takes effect to the company, and thus, he cannot become a shareholder of the company. Thus, the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders can be deemed to exist by such person.

B. It cannot be said that it is against the closed-end doctrine to seek confirmation of non-existence of a resolution of a general meeting of shareholders at the general meeting of shareholders who attended as a shareholder while the share transferee transferred shares to the shareholders but without completing the procedures for transferring shares.

Article 336 of the Commercial Act

Plaintiff

Anti-Do Tourism Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 78Na1132 delivered on November 17, 1978

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In light of the reasoning of the judgment, the court below held that the company established the tourist business, tourist products manufacturing and sales business for its business purpose, etc. as well as 6,700 shares as registered shares, and that the plaintiff 1 owned 600 shares, 200 shares, 30 shares, 1,500 shares, and 1,00 shares, and the representative director was the plaintiff, 50 shares, 3, and 60 shares, and 7 representing the plaintiff 5, 3, 6, and the plaintiff was the non-party 8 of the company's company's trade name, domestic travel brokerage right, tourist products, telephone office's subscription right, office's subscription right, and 6,000 shares, and the non-party 8's share certificate's acquisition or transfer of shares can not be viewed as being in violation of the above provision of the company's share certificates under the premise that the company's temporary acquisition or transfer of shares can not be viewed as being in violation of the purport of the company's acquisition or transfer of shares.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of the appeal shall be borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Do-ho (Presiding Justice)