Creditor (Appointed Party) (Attorney Yang Sung-ho, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

○○○○○ (Law Firm Han-chul, Attorneys Jeon Soo-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul Eastern District Court Order 2019Kahap10372 dated November 1, 2019

1. All appeals filed by creditors (appointed parties) and additional appeals filed by this court shall be dismissed;

2. The costs of lawsuit after the filing of an appeal shall be borne by the creditor.

1. Purport of request;

The obligor must allow the obligor to peruse or copy (including reproduction of the photographing and digital storage device) the books and documents (hereinafter “instant application documents”) in attached Form 2 at the obligor’s head office, branch office, office, or the storage place (hereinafter “instant application documents”) for 30 days from three days to 18:00 days after the date on which the obligee (the appointed party, hereinafter “creditor”) and the appointed party (hereinafter “creditors”) and his/her agent and assistant are served the instant decision. If the obligor requests the obligor to send the instant application documents by electronic means to the address or facsimile number designated by the obligee, the obligor must comply therewith. If the obligor fails to perform the above obligation, the obligor filed an application with the court for perusal or copy of the documents in attached Form 2 at the rate of 3,00,000 to one day from the day following the expiration date of the obligation.

2. Purport of appeal;

The decision of the court of first instance is modified as follows. The obligor must allow the obligor to peruse or copy the application documents of this case at the obligor's head office, branch office, office, or storage place (including reproduction to photographs and digital storage device) for 30 days from 3 days after the date the obligees, their agents, and assistants received the decision of this case, excluding Saturdays and holidays. If the obligor requests the obligee to copy the application documents of this case within the above period by electronic means and send them to the e-mail address or facsimile number designated by the obligee, the obligor must comply with the obligor (the obligee filed an appeal against the entire part against the obligee in the original decision of the court of first instance, but this court partially withdrawn the appeal against the part dismissing the application for indirect compulsory performance).

1. cite the decision of the court of first instance;

The reason for an obligee’s appeal is not significantly different from the argument in the first instance trial, and even if the materials submitted to this court are presented to this court, the first instance judgment is justifiable (the application documents of this case, excluding the parts cited in the first instance trial, are excessively comprehensive, and the period and scope of the application documents of this case, excluding the remaining documents cited in the first instance trial, are excessively comprehensive, and the need to require the obligee to directly peruse and copy the documents cited by the first instance trial and to send them by electronic mail and facsimile does not exist). Therefore, the reason for the court’s entry in this case is the same as the entry in the reasoning for the first instance judgment, except for the determination as to the additional assertion by the obligee as set forth in paragraph (2) above, since it is identical to the entry in the reasoning for the first instance judgment, this is cited including the summary pursuant to Articles 203-3(1) and 203(1)2 of the Regulations on Civil Execution.

2. Additional determination

A. Summary of creditor's assertion

1) The first instance court cited only the part of the documents listed in Paragraph 2 of the attached list among the documents listed in Paragraphs 2 through 4 of the attached list of applications. Since the above documents were operated by ○○○, the above documents were operated, the perusal and copy of the documents alone cannot achieve the purpose of this part of the application.

2) The obligees and ○○○○○ also apply for the perusal and copying of the monthly meeting minutes of “△△△△△ Group” and the regular statement of settlement of accounts (hereinafter “monthly meeting minutes, etc.”) which are the regular meetings created by the obligees and ○○○○○○ to establish the debtor.

B. Determination

1) It is insufficient to vindicate the fact that the materials submitted by the creditor to this court alone were fabricated by each of the documents listed in Paragraph (2) of the attached list of the attached list of the court of first instance. In addition, according to the records, the Han shareholder Doll Co., Ltd. entered the rehabilitation procedure after obtaining a decision from the court on December 5, 2019 (Seoul Rehabilitation Court 2019 Mahap10205). The New Accounting Corporation, an inspector appointed under the above rehabilitation procedure, prepared and submitted an investigation report containing the detailed property status of the above company, the circumstances leading to the rehabilitation procedure, etc., and each of the facts supporting the above investigation report. Thus, the creditor can achieve a considerable portion of the above company's property status, etc. which is the purpose of the application by inspecting the above investigation report. Accordingly, this part of the creditor's assertion is without merit.

2) “Books and documents of accounts” under Article 466(1) of the Commercial Act refers to the reasons for minority shareholders to seek perusal and copying, and the account books and documents that form evidentiary materials, which are substantially related to the reasons for minority shareholders to seek perusal and copying (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da58051, Oct. 26, 2001, etc.). Even upon the creditor’s assertion, the monthly meeting minutes, etc. are related to the “△△△△△ meeting,” which is an individual meeting of the creditors and ○○○○○○○○, and it is difficult to regard them as “the account books and documents of the debtor’s account.” Furthermore, the creditor does not sufficiently explain the reasons for the request for perusal and copying, etc., and therefore, the creditor’s assertion in this part is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the decision of the first instance court is just, and the creditor's appeal and the addition of this court are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(attached Form omitted)

Judges Kim Yong-seok (Presiding Judge)