logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2019.06.27 2019다209406
회사에 관한 소송
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the allegation in the grounds of appeal regarding the claim for the implementation of the transfer procedure, the lower court determined that Defendant C transferred 2,500 shares of Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) to the Plaintiff on the grounds as stated in its reasoning.

Examining the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the certification or presumption of the authenticity of private documents, which are disposal documents, and the interpretation of legal acts.

2. As to the allegation in the grounds of appeal regarding the claim for damages arising from the violation of a trade agreement, the lower court rejected Defendant C’s assertion that the extinctive prescription applies to the Plaintiff’s damage claim on grounds of its stated reasoning.

Examining the record in accordance with the relevant legal principles, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on merchants or commercial claims.

(2) For the remaining grounds of appeal except for the claim of commercial extinctive prescription, the court below acknowledged the fact that the business agreement of the instant case between the Plaintiff and the Defendant C, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, should be concluded by unfairly deducting the E’s benefits, etc. to be disbursed from the Plaintiff’s water resource-related amount, which is lower than 50% of the Plaintiff’s actual shares in the joint expenses, from the Plaintiff’s water resource-related area among the Defendant Company’s businesses, brought about 80% of the total amount in the pertinent field while the Defendant C independently operates the road-related area, and used the remaining 20% as a joint expense, and then divide the remaining amount not paid until the end of the year according to the ratio of 50:50, which is the shares of each Defendant Company.

arrow