logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원진주지원 2017.06.01 2015가합10656
주주명부명의개서이행 등
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. A transferor of basic facts: The number of shares acquired by the transferor from among 141,395 common shares of 10,000 won per share issued by the defendant company: B 38,968 shares (40%) and C 48,372 shares (50%) and D 9,675 shares (10%) held by the transferor: The date of payment of KRW 2 billion: November 30, 2014;

On August 27, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a transfer agreement (hereinafter the instant transfer agreement) with the Defendant, Appointers C, and D on the content that the shares of the Defendant Company owned by the Plaintiff are transferred in KRW 2 billion as follows, and entered into a transfer agreement (hereinafter the instant transfer agreement) in relation thereto, and entered into the “E Stock Trading Agreement” agreement (hereinafter the instant agreement”).

B. Although the Plaintiff transferred shares pursuant to the instant transfer contract, it was notified that the transfer contract of this case was cancelled through content-certified mail on December 2, 2014 and March 9, 2015, as the Plaintiff was unable to receive KRW 2 billion from the Defendant, Selected C, and D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 4, Eul evidence 14 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The instant agreement

1. The Plaintiff asserted as to paragraph 62 (2) of the current issue at issue. The Plaintiff did not submit a guarantee of KRW 1.2 billion out of the share transfer price of KRW 2 billion on August 27, 2014, which was drafted by the instant agreement, and did not submit the said guarantee, and notified the performance thereof on December 2, 2014, and notified the cancellation of the instant transfer contract on March 9, 2015, and the said transfer contract was lawfully rescinded. As such, the Defendant, Appointed, C, and D returned each of the shares listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff, and the Defendant Company is obligated to perform the transfer transfer procedure.

In order to cancel a contract on the grounds of default under Article 544 of the Civil Act, the obligee is not required to achieve the purpose of the contract, and if the obligation in question is not fulfilled, the purpose of the contract is not achieved.

arrow