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. Basic facts

A. The parties 1) The defendant is a company established for the purpose of indoor decoration business, museum exhibition planning, etc. 2) The plaintiff and C own shares of 50% each of them, and the plaintiff and C are siblings.

B. On May 19, 2016, the Plaintiff’s claim for inspection and copying of the Plaintiff’s account books, etc., and the Defendant’s refusal Plaintiff filed a claim for inspection and copying of the Plaintiff’s corporate funds on the following grounds: “The Defendant has no special business performance; the amount of the company’s funds are paid to executives without a resolution for payment of the officer’s remuneration; and the company’s funds are fairly executed; and the Defendant’s claim for inspection and copying of the account books, documents, etc. entered in the attached list (hereinafter “instant account books, etc.”) to verify the accuracy of the company’s funds execution. However, the content certification sent to the Defendant’s address was sent to the Defendant’s company’s address and the Defendant’s representative director D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. According to the relevant legal doctrine and Article 466(1) of the Commercial Act, shareholders who hold shares representing no less than 3/100 of the total issued and outstanding shares may request, in writing, the inspection or copying of the accounting books and documents (hereinafter “accounting books, etc.”) with reasons attached thereto. Since allowing perusal or copying of accounting books, etc. is serious for accounting management, it must be carefully recorded in order to make a decision as to whether there is a duty to comply with inspection or copying and to the extent that it should not be permitted to allow perusal or copying to the other party.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da137 delivered on December 21, 1999, see Supreme Court Decision 99Da137 delivered on December 21, 199).