logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2019.05.02 2018나312396
주식명의개서
Text

1. The part against Defendant B among the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. Of the instant lawsuit, Defendant B Co., Ltd.

Reasons

1. We examine whether the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is legitimate or not, ex officio, as to whether the Plaintiff’s claim for the transfer of title against Defendant B was lawful or not.

If a person who has entrusted a shareholder’s name terminates the title trust contract with the trustee, the shareholder’s right is immediately returned to the title truster, and it does not require a new legal act to transfer shares.

Therefore, a title truster may independently file a claim for change of title against the company by proving the fact that he/she held a title trust without obtaining cooperation from the title trustee.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da16386, Oct. 27, 1992). The same applies to cases where a share transfer contract is rescinded after a share transfer contract is concluded and a transfer of ownership is transferred accordingly.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s transfer of ownership to Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) on the register of shareholders is merely allowed by proving the cancellation of a share transfer contract with respect to the instant shares between Defendant B, and claiming the implementation of the transfer procedure against Defendant B is unlawful as there is no legal interest in the lawsuit, as there is no legal interest in the lawsuit.

Therefore, this part of the lawsuit is dismissed.

2. Determination as to the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant C

A. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited this part of the judgment is as follows, in addition to adding the following judgments to the allegations that the plaintiff needs to be newly admitted by this court, and thus, this part of the judgment is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420

(The first instance court's findings and judgments are justifiable in light of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in this court, which was duly adopted and investigated by the first instance court.

arrow