The relationship between the company and the company of those who acquired golf membership with the so-called Slunium;

A person who acquired golf membership from a company that operates a golf course does not directly acquire golf membership from the company that operates the golf course and acquired by the non-party from the same person is merely subject to the transfer of the right to use golf course facilities and the right to claim the return of deposit that the non-party had held against the company, and regardless of how much the transfer price paid to the non-party is, the non-party may claim the return of the golf course membership only within the limit of

Article 449 of the Civil Act

Kim Jong-il

[1] The liquidation company of the reorganization company

1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff shall confirm the reorganization claim amounting to KRW 2,750,000 against Macriak Co., Ltd. (the trade name before the change, the reputation of the stock company, etc.).

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant.

On February 28, 1984 with respect to the company reorganization proceedings conducted by the above company, PY-1, it is reported that the above company has the right to claim the return of 2,750,000 won of the above golf course facility usage right and the deposit amount of 6,950,000 won as reorganization claims concerning 1 golf course units (members number, YTK-1) of the golf course operated by the above company, in the case of the company reorganization proceedings conducted by the above company at the party members on February 28, 1984. On May 28, 1984, the fact that the defendant raised an objection against the part of the right to claim the return of 2,750,000 won of the above reported reorganization claim as of the date of investigation into reorganization claims, etc. is significant.

On August 29, 1983, when the plaintiff disposed of golf membership that was opened in the name of the executive officers of the reorganization company in the form of the reorganization company in order to raise funds, the plaintiff purchased one golf membership account from the reorganization company in the name of the non-party Kim Jong-ho, which was the representative director of the reorganization company at the time, and paid the above price to the liquidation company in the name of the liquidation company at that time, and became a golf member of the liquidation company, so the liquidation company is responsible for returning the deposit amount of KRW 6,950,000 to the plaintiff, even though the defendant raised an objection against the portion exceeding KRW 4,20,000,00, and therefore, it is argued that the plaintiff was entitled to the confirmation of the claim stated in the purport of this case, but there is no dispute between the parties, such as the above plaintiff Kim Jong-ho, but the plaintiff acquired the above golf membership account in the name of the above non-party Kim Jong-ho, and there is no evidence that the plaintiff acquired it from the above 000.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have received the right to use golf course facilities and the right to claim the return of deposit amount of KRW 4,200,000, which the non-party Kim Jong-ho held against the reorganization company. Thus, regardless of the amount of the transfer price paid to the non-party Kim Kim Kim Kim-ho, the plaintiff can claim the return of deposit only within the limit of KRW 4,200,000 to the reorganization company. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case seeking the confirmation of reorganization claim as to the excess portion is dismissed without any reason to view the remainder, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the application of Article 89 of the Civil Procedure Act as to the

Judges Park Jong-chul (Presiding Judge)