beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant C’s KRW 37,500,000 and annual interest thereon from June 19, 2014 to December 19, 2014; and
Reasons
1. Evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (the defendant raises a defense to the effect that the existence or authenticity of evidence Nos. 1 through 3 is denied. However, in full view of the overall purport of the arguments as to the witness E’s testimony, the tax accountant F office of this court, and the G Tax Accounting Office’s fact-finding results, it can be acknowledged that a stock transfer or takeover contract was made out, and the defendant’s above assertion is not accepted)’s whole purport of arguments, the plaintiff entered into a contract for stock transfer or takeover (hereinafter “the first contract for stock transfer”) with Defendant D on September 13, 2013, on which KRW 2850,00 shares of H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “the non-party company”) were transferred at KRW 750,500,000,000,000 won, and on November 4, 2013, the fact that the defendant transferred the shares of the company to Defendant B at KRW 375,750,750,7500,00 won.
Therefore, the Defendants are obligated to pay the above share transfer price and damages for delay to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.
2. Defendant’s defense
A. The agreement on stock transfer and acquisition between the plaintiff and the defendants is null and void as a formal false declaration of agreement concluded for the purpose of equity settlement of the non-party company.
B. Determination (i) In full view of the facts without dispute over the first transfer contract, Gap evidence Nos. 6 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 3-1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 4 through 6, Eul's testimony of witness E, and the whole purport of the arguments in the personal examination of defendant Eul, the plaintiff and defendant Eul established the non-party company by investing the plaintiff 50 million won, defendant Eul's 100 million won around August 13, 2013, and from that time, the plaintiff was divided into 7,350 shares with 49% of the total number of shares issued, 50 million won, and 7,650 shares with 51% of the total number of shares issued. The plaintiff owned from defendant Eul as the funds of defendant Eul since the plaintiff was actually funds of the defendant Eul.