logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원동부지원 2020.02.13 2019가합104371
회사에 관한 소송
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a shareholder who owns 15,00 shares equivalent to 30% of the total number of shares issued by Defendant C, and Defendant B is a director and representative director of Defendant C, Defendant B violates the duty of prohibition of competition as a director, Defendant B violates the duty of prohibition of competition, occupational breach of trust, and the Plaintiff committed an unlawful act or a violation of the law in relation to his duties, such as nullifying the effect of the provisional disposition order issued by Defendant C against D, and thus, Defendant B must be dismissed from office as a director of Defendant C.

2. Article 385(2) of the Commercial Act provides that, in a case where a director refuses to dismiss the Defendants’ defense prior to the Defendants’ filing of the merits despite a fraudulent act in connection with his duties, or a serious violation of the statutes, or the articles of incorporation, a shareholder holding no less than 3/10 of the total issued and outstanding shares may file a claim with the court for dismissal of the said director within one month from the date when the general

Therefore, in order for a minority shareholder to file a lawsuit for dismissal of a director, a minority shareholder who holds no less than 3/10 of the total issued and outstanding shares shall submit to the board of directors a document stating the purpose of the meeting and the reasons for convening the meeting, and if he/she refuses to convene the meeting, he/she may convene the general meeting with the permission of the court, and if he/she refuses to convene the meeting, he/she may request the court to dismiss the director within one month from the time he/she refuses to dismiss the general meeting of shareholders, and there is no evidence to deem that the plaintiff underwent the above procedure.

3. If so, the instant lawsuit is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow