corporation shall not be deemed to have effectively acquired its own shares.

Although the company asserts that it has acquired the shares held in title trust, it is not allowed to acquire its own shares in addition to allowing the acquisition of its own shares in violation of the Commercial Act or the Securities and Exchange Act, and since the acquisition of its own shares in violation of the prohibition provisions is null and void, it cannot be deemed that the

2012 Gohap6232 Action for Claim for Transfer of Shares

Korea

AABD Co., Ltd.

January 25, 2013

February 8, 2013

1. As to the shares listed in the separate sheet 1, the Defendant shall implement the transfer transfer procedure by changing the name of the shareholder listed in the separate list 1 to Nonparty GaB (00, address: 000 OOdong, Gangdong-gu, Seoul).

2. The defendant shall bear the costs of the lawsuit.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff has a tax claim amounting to KRW 000 in total as shown in the attached Table 2 against the non-party ParkB, and the details of active property of ParkB, as shown in the attached Table 3, are 000 won in total of the appraised value of the land owned and the stock in the attached Table 3, and current ParkB is in insolvent.

B. Meanwhile, from around December 1992, the Defendant’s shareholder registry was registered as a shareholder holding the Defendant’s shares of 76,000 shares, and Korea-China (hereinafter “the instant shares”) with 26,000 shares, which were registered in the name of SongCC and Korea-DD, and Korea-Japan was registered under a title trust with 26,00 shares registered in its name to the Defendant on March 6, 2010. Accordingly, Korea-China sent a request for share transfer registration to change the ownership of 76,00 shares, which were registered in its name, to the Defendant on March 6, 2010, and transmitted the notice to the title trusterB on March 19, 2012.

[Grounds for Recognition] The non-sovered facts, Gap evidence 1, 2, and 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

1) The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff, as a creditor of ParkB, on the ground that each title trust agreement on the instant shares between ParkB, SongB, and HanD was terminated, sought entry into the transfer of the instant shares against the Defendant on behalf of ParkB in subrogation of ParkB.

2) Determination

According to the above, each title trust agreement on the instant shares between ParkBBD and SongCC was terminated on March 6, 2010, and SongCC on March 19, 2012 at the time when the title truster ParkB requested the Defendant to transfer the instant shares to the Defendant on March 19, 2012, and ParkBB had the right to request the Defendant to implement the transfer registration procedure on the register of shareholders in its name. Since ParkB had the right to request the Defendant to implement the transfer registration procedure on the register of shareholders in its name, and the Plaintiff did not exercise the said right under the insolvency of ParkBB, the Plaintiff has the right to request the transfer registration on the instant shares by subrogation of ParkB in order to preserve its claim against ParkB.

B. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

1) The defendant, on March 3, 2012, stated that 76,000 shares under title trust were acquired by the defendant in accordance with a resolution of approval of the defendant's board of directors on March 3, 2012, the defendant did not acquire his own shares on his own account except as otherwise provided in each subparagraph of Article 341 of the Commercial Act, and the company's acquisition of its own shares on its own account may cause various harm, such as undermining the company's capital foundation, undermining the interests of shareholders and creditors, impairing the principle of equality of shareholders, and causing unfair control by the representative director, etc. Therefore, the Commercial Act uniformly prohibits the acquisition of its own shares from a general preventive purpose, and specifically specifies them, it is difficult to recognize that the defendant's acquisition of its own shares constitutes an exceptional provision of Article 341, Article 341-2, Article 342-2, or Article 342-2, or the Securities and Exchange Act, and that the defendant's acquisition of its own shares constitutes an exceptional provision of the company's own shares under consideration.

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.