(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.06 2014나36513

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.06 2014나36513

총회결의무효확인

Text

1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

Basic Facts

This Court's use of this part is identical to the statement of "1............., the reasons for this Court's use are the same as the statement of "......................, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Whether the resolution of the general assembly of this case was null and void because it did not meet the quorum, or the defendant Charter, which was in force at the time of the general assembly of this case, was amended on September 14, 199. There is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that 40 or more members of the group were not present at the time of the resolution of the general assembly of this case. According to the evidence No. 8, the defendant Charter amended on September 14, 199, as follows, can be acknowledged as to the composition of the general assembly and the quorum of the general assembly of this case.

Article 9 (Composition of General Meeting)The Assembly shall be composed of:

(1) The terms of office for officers and members of a clan shall be three years.

Article 19 (Resolution) (1) Meetings shall be held with attendance of a majority of the quorum, and the consent of a majority of the present members shall be determined with the consent of a majority of the present members, and

(2) The general meeting shall be held with attendance of at least 40 members (excluding ex officio members) of each class.

Provided, That the Assembly may delegate to the other members the power of attorney.

According to the above facts, it is evident that the general meeting of this case was held without meeting the quorum requirements set forth in the defendant charter. Thus, each resolution of the above general meeting is invalid without any need to examine the remaining arguments of the plaintiffs.

In addition, as long as the defendant asserts that each of the above resolutions made at the general assembly of this case is valid, the plaintiffs have the interest to seek confirmation of nullity.

In regard to this, the defendant's terms of office are as follows.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대전지방법원홍성지원 2017.11.28 2016가단6125

-부산고등법원 2019.04.18 2018나58168

-춘천지방법원 원주지원 2018.02.22 2017가합304

-서울동부지방법원 2017.05.11 2016가합104072

-청주지방법원 2015.08.07 2014나2168