Only the quantity of shares to be transferred shall be determined and the validity of a stock transfer contract not specifically specified.

In order to transfer registered general shares, if the shares to be transferred are determined only in the quantity and are not specifically specified, the share transfer contract is null and void unless the object is specified.

Articles 336 and 375 of the Commercial Act

Supreme Court Decision 75Da2252 delivered on April 13, 1976 (Supreme Court Decision 11163 delivered on April 13, 1976, Supreme Court Decision 24Nu civil 2222 delivered on April 24, 200, Decision 536No9105 delivered on July 5, 200, Court Gazette 336(5)734 delivered on April 13, 197, Court Gazette 536No9105 of the Commercial Act

Lee-soo et al.

Sponsoracing

Sung Dong-dong branch of Seoul District Court (73Gahap802) in the first instance court

The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' legal representative shall revoke the original judgment. The defendant shall, with respect to the sovereignty of the modern city development corporation listed in the attached list No. 1, endorsement of each transfer on the said share certificates listed in the attached list No. 2 to the plaintiff leapti, and deliver it to the plaintiff leapti.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant and the declaration of provisional execution that all of the first and second trials are assessed against the defendant.

There is no dispute between the parties as to the facts that the Defendant, on November 9, 1972, ordered that the Defendant transfer the registered common shares 2,730 shares in the name of the Defendant of the modern urban development corporation, and that the Defendant transferred the shares 546 shares in the name of the Defendant of the Plaintiff of the Plaintiff of the Plaintiff of the Republic of Korea to the Plaintiff of the Republic of Korea on December 6, 1972, issued and delivered a certificate of stock transfer to the Plaintiffs, and the facts that the Defendant holds the share certificates in the attached Tables 1 and 2. (The Defendant, as above, stated in the 8th date of pleading in the court below, made a confession that he held the share certificates as above, and did not hold the share certificates at the fifth date of pleading in the court of the first instance, and thus, revoked the confession, but there is no evidence to support that the confession was against the truth and was caused by mistake, as the Defendant’s certificate of transfer

As above, the plaintiffs asserted that the 2,730 shares that were transferred to the defendant was transferred to the defendant as stated in the separate sheet No. 1, and that the 540 shares out of 546 shares that were transferred to the defendant had reached the principal suit in order to receive each transfer endorsement with the share certificates listed in the separate sheet No. 2, the defendant first did not specify the share certificates that the defendant decided to transfer to the plaintiffs. Thus, the above transfer contract is null and void, and the above dispute between the plaintiffs and the defendant is null and void. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the defendant's transfer of 2,730 shares out of the registered common shares of modern city development corporation's own name was decided to transfer 546 shares to the plaintiff Ying-I, and that it did not specify only the quantity of shares to be transferred to the plaintiff Y.

Therefore, under the premise that the above transfer contract is valid, the plaintiff's claim for an endorser as to the share certificates in the separate sheet shall be dismissed because it has no reason to decide on the remaining dispute of the defendant. Thus, the original judgment with the same conclusion is just and the plaintiff's appeal is not reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the application of Articles 95, 89, and 93 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the share certificates in the separate sheet.

Judges fixed number (Presiding Judge) and shot-dong