beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s 8,00 shares in common shares of KRW 5,000 per face value of the issuance of Defendant D Co., Ltd., and Defendant C.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Of the face value shares of KRW 5,000 per face value of the issuance of Defendant D Co., Ltd., Defendant B owns 8,000 shares in its name and 16,000 shares in its name.
B. Each of the above shares was owned by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff held title trust with Defendant B and C.
C. The Plaintiff expressed to the Defendants the intent to terminate the above title trust.
【Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4
2. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, since it is determined that the shareholder's right of 8,000 shares in the name of Defendant B and 16,000 shares in the name of Defendant C among the common shares of KRW 5,000 in face value of the issuance of Defendant D Co., Ltd., exists in the Plaintiff, it is confirmed that the shareholder's right of each of
Therefore, Defendant D, upon the Plaintiff’s request, is obligated to implement the transfer procedure to change the name of shareholder on the register of shareholders to each of the above shares under the name of the Plaintiff.
3. The Defendants’ assertion and determination are deemed to have asserted that “ insofar as Defendant B and C on the register of shareholders are recorded as shareholders despite the above title trust facts, as long as Defendant B and C on the register of shareholders are indicated as shareholders, Defendant B and C shall be a shareholder. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim shall be dismissed.” However, the claim of this case concerns internal legal relations between the Plaintiff, Defendant B and C, which are the parties to the title trust, and there is no room for the application of the legal principles on the purpose of protecting a third party as alleged by the Defendants in the internal legal relations between the parties. Therefore
4. The conclusion is that the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.