beta
Text
The defendant shall change the name of the shareholder on the register of shareholders as to the shares listed in the attached list to the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the shareholder of the shares listed in the attached list (hereinafter “instant shares”) on the Defendant’s list of shareholders in the judgment on the cause of the claim is stated C. However, around 2001, the Plaintiff trusted the instant shares to C in title trust; the Plaintiff expressed to C around 2020 the intent to terminate the title trust on the instant shares; and the fact that the instant shares were not issued with respect to the instant shares is nonexistent between the parties, or that the shares were not issued, may be acknowledged by taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in the evidence Nos. 1 and 4, and no other counter-proof exists.
(1) The Defendant’s Intervenor argues to the effect that it is difficult to recognize the title trust of the instant shares solely on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff and C’s domicile are the same; and (b) the details of transactions asserted by the Plaintiff as the details of the payment of shares are after the establishment of the Defendant; (c) the Plaintiff expressed his intent to terminate the title trust of the instant shares; and (d) the Plaintiff’s right to the instant shares was returned to the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff expressed his intention to cancel the title trust of the instant shares.
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement transfer procedures with respect to the shares of this case to the plaintiff who is a beneficial shareholder.
2. The defendant's assertion on the shares of this case asserted that since the defendant's intervenor joining the defendant seized the shares of this case on the grounds of the delinquency of national taxes in arrears of C, transfer of ownership to the plaintiff at his discretion.
According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant joining the defendant attached the shares of this case as the debtor on October 8, 2007 and notified the defendant of this fact.
However, the effect of prohibition of disposal of shares before issuance is absolute.