1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court below's acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except where the defendant adds a judgment on a new argument at the court of first instance as follows, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is.

(main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act). 2. New arguments and determination made by the defendant in the trial

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion was that the Plaintiff entered into the instant mechanical underwriting agreement with D and acquired each of the instant mechanical instruments in the capacity of promoters for C, which was scheduled to be established.

After the establishment of C, the Plaintiff transferred the ownership by transferring possession of each of the instant machinery to C.

B. The term "company in the process of the establishment of a corporation" is established only when promoters, in the process of the establishment of a corporation, acquire the rights and duties acquired by the promoters through the act necessary for the establishment of the corporation, explain the relationship attributable to the established corporation at the same time as the establishment of the corporation, and the articles of incorporation is prepared

The rights and obligations acquired by promoters prior to the establishment of a corporation in the course of such establishment are attributable to promoters individuals or promoters associations in accordance with specific circumstances, and there is a special transfer of rights and obligations belonging to them, such as takeover or acquisition of contractor status, in order to revert to the corporation after establishment.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 93Da50215 delivered on January 28, 1994; 97Da56020 delivered on May 12, 1998, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, there is no assertion or evidence by the Defendant that the Plaintiff had been established as the “company during the establishment” at the time of acquiring each of the instant machinery.

According to the evidence No. 12, the acceptance of C’s shares was made on May 22, 2015.

Thus, even if the Plaintiff acquired each of the instant machines as the promoters of C, as so argued by the Defendant, C has the substance as “company during the establishment.”