logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2015.09.10 2015가합140
양수금
Text

1. The part of the conjunctive claim in the instant lawsuit is dismissed.

2. All of the plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.

3...

Reasons

On September 29, 2011, the Plaintiffs asserted by the parties, transferred the shares of D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”) to E at par value of KRW 612,500,000, the said shares were subject to a resolution of the general meeting of shareholders to receive a share ratio of the net assets according to the evaluation that the said shares transfer did not reflect the net asset value.

Therefore, the non-party company decided to transfer to the plaintiffs the claim amounting to KRW 1,435,00,000, which is the amount equivalent to 35% of the plaintiffs' shareholding ratio, from the balance of the net assets of the non-party company except corporate tax to be paid. On October 6, 2011, the plaintiffs transferred the claim amounting to KRW 4,408,085,037, and the claim amounting to KRW 1,435,00,000, out of KRW 300,000, and the claim amounting to KRW 1,435,00,00,000, which is the claim amounting to KRW 1,303,80,00,000, and the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff Eul and the non-party company delay damages.

The conjunctive plaintiffs have a claim equivalent to the above dividend amount, and the defendant is obligated to pay the non-party company the construction price of KRW 4,408,085,037 and the loan of KRW 300,000,000 to the non-party company. The defendant is obligated to pay KRW 1,303,800,000 in subrogation of the non-party company's right to claim the construction price and the loan of KRW 65,60,000 to the plaintiff B and C, respectively.

As to whether the plaintiffs received the claim against the Defendants of the non-party company as dividend rent from the non-party company, it is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiffs received the claim against the Defendants of the non-party company as dividend only with the statement of evidence No. 3, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, according to the statement of evidence No. 3, the non-party company is the shareholder of the non-party company on October 6, 201, according to the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders.

arrow