logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.09.16 2015가합71696
회사에 관한 소송
Text

1. The merger by split on October 16, 2014 between Defendant Water NC Co., Ltd and Defendant Jinsung Electric Co., Ltd. shall be conducted.

Reasons

The Plaintiff is a B-C Co., Ltd., and the Defendants entered into a contract with the Defendants on the division of each of the electrical construction businesses in Jinsung Electric Co., Ltd., and the merger of the divided parts thereof (hereinafter “each of the instant divided parts”). The Defendant Water C-C Co., Ltd and the Defendant Jinsung Electric Co., Ltd completed the registration of each of the instant divided parts on October 16, 2014; and the Defendant Jinsung Co., Ltd. on October 24, 2014; and the Defendants did not undergo the creditor protection procedure in the process of each of the instant divided parts.

However, Articles 530-11(2) and 527-5(1) of the Commercial Act provide that "a company shall publicly announce within two weeks from the date of a resolution of approval of the general meeting of shareholders under Article 522 that any creditor who has an objection to a merger should submit the report within a period of not less than one month and make a peremptory notice to the creditor known to the effect that such merger has an objection to the merger." In light of the fact that the merger after division causes a significant change in the company's property, which is the security of the claim, from the creditor of the company, and that there may be considerable difficulty in collecting the claim due to the merger after division, unless special circumstances exist, in the event that the creditor protection procedure prescribed by the Commercial

Therefore, as seen earlier, insofar as the Defendants did not properly implement the creditor protection procedure under the Commercial Act, such as the peremptory procedure against creditors, there is a serious error in the procedure of each of the instant merger by split, and therefore, each of the instant merger by split shall be null and void.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all.

arrow