logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 포항지원 2018.05.31 2017가합525
사원출자지분 양도등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The instant company is a limited partnership company engaged in Byung's occupation and sales business of soft drinks, and is composed of E (value of 11,250,000 won), F (value of 22,50,000 won) (value of investment), Defendant (value of 11,250,000 won) who is a partner with limited liability, and G (value of 5,00,000 won) who is a partner with limited liability.

B. The Plaintiff held 22.5% (the amount of investment KRW 11,250,00) out of the shares of the instant company, and the Plaintiff terminated the title trust agreement on September 1, 2016, when it was held in title trust with F.

C. Of the articles of incorporation of the instant company, the contents pertaining to the instant case are as follows.

Article 5 (Transfer of Shares) Members shall not transfer their shares to any other person without the consent of all the members.

Provided, That this shall not apply between the same member.

If it is intended to amend the articles of incorporation or do any other act beyond the scope of the purpose of the company, consent of all the members shall be obtained.

No member shall become a member without the consent of all the members under Article 15.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff terminated the title trust agreement concluded with F on September 1, 2016 and received a refund of 22.5% of the shares of the instant company that held the title trust to F. As such, the Plaintiff intends to become a member with limited liability of the instant company with the Defendant’s consent.

However, since the defendant has avoided his consent, the defendant is demanding the defendant to consent to the entry of the plaintiff as a limited partner of the company of this case by the lawsuit of this case.

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that F would enter the instant company since 22.5% of the shares of the instant company, which was nominal in trust, were returned to F. However, in the manner that a third party becomes a partner of a limited partnership company after the establishment of a limited partnership company, the method of acquiring the employee qualification and acquiring the shares from the existing employee (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Da77567, Apr. 9, 2002). The Plaintiff is the instant company.

arrow