beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
On March 17, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired the instant shares from D Co., Ltd. (a separate company whose name and trade name are the same as those of the Plaintiff’s previous change, and hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”). The Plaintiff notified the Defendant on August 14, 2018, and accordingly, the Defendant asserts that the transfer procedure should be implemented by the Plaintiff as the shareholder of the instant shares.
On the other hand, the defendant asserts that there is a seizure order prior to the above assignment notice, and thus it is impossible to respond to the plaintiff's request.
Judgment
According to the statement in Gap evidence No. 1, the company transferring the shares was holding the shares of this case, which are 5% (152,400 shares) of the shares issued by the defendant, and the plaintiff entered into a contract to acquire the shares of this case from the company transferring the shares of this case on March 17, 2014, and it is recognized that the company transferring the shares notified the defendant thereof on August 14, 2018.
In a case where a claim has been transferred doublely, the order between the assignee is not determined by the time after the date of the fixed date attached to the notification or consent, but by the debtor’s perception on the assignment of claim, namely, by the date and time when the notification of the transfer with the fixed date reaches the debtor or after the date of the consent with the fixed date. This legal doctrine applies to a case where the executor of the seizure order determines a heat between the assignee and the same claim, so the order of assignment with the fixed date and the order of seizure should be determined by the date after the arrival of the garnishee (the debtor in the case of the assignment of claim) of the original copy
In light of the fact that there is no dispute, as a whole, the entire purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in the facts of this court (EM search result), Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), the creditors F, prior to the notification of the transfer of shares, shall be the obligor D Co., Ltd. as of January 9, 2014, Busan District Court No. 2014TT429.