logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.05.11 2017가합552682
주주권확인
Text

1. It is confirmed that the Plaintiff is a shareholder of each share listed in the separate sheet 1 and 2.

2. The request of an independent party intervenor;

Reasons

Basic Facts

E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) is a corporation established on June 29, 200 for the purpose of advertising agency business, printing and publishing business, etc.

The Plaintiff was in office as the representative director of the instant company from June 29, 200 to June 25, 2010, and from January 2, 2017 to July 31, 2017, and the independent party intervenor is in office as the representative director of the instant company from June 29, 200 to July 31, 2017. The independent party intervenor is in office as the representative director of the instant company from June 25, 2010 to January 2, 2017, and from July 31, 2017.

The shareholder registry of the instant company is indicated as follows with respect to the shareholders and shares held by the instant company.

(2) The Plaintiff agreed on July 6, 2017 to sell and purchase the shares of the instant company owned by the Plaintiff to F Co., Ltd. with the major shareholder (hereinafter “instant subscription to acquisition of shares”), and to sell and purchase the shares of the instant company owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant subscription to acquisition of shares”), when the Plaintiff is deemed to be a title truster in the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff’s representative director 17,850,50, and the Plaintiff’s independent party intervenor 3,90,000, in total, 30,000, in March 5, 2010, when the Plaintiff was deemed to be a title truster in the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff agreed on July 6, 2017 (hereinafter “instant subscription to acquisition of shares”).

[Reasons for Recognition] The Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings as to the Plaintiff’s title trust to the Defendants, on the grounds that there was no dispute, Gap’s 1, 2, 9, 10, and 11 evidence (including each number, if any), and the Plaintiff’s assertion of the purport of the entire pleadings. Thus, the title trust agreement is terminated and the Plaintiff seeks confirmation of the

A title truster who has held title trust with the instant shares asserted by an independent party.

arrow