beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole in the entry of evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 6, 15, 21, 12, and 13, 2, and 15 (Provided, That the entry of evidence No. 15, which is not believed later than the entry of evidence No. 15).
G, which operated the “F” as a manufacturer of shipbuilding machinery, equipment, etc. in Busan-gun E, was established with the Defendant Company as a trade name “F Company” on July 13, 199, on which G invested F’s factory and machinery equipment in kind, and H converted F into a corporation by investing KRW 250 million, and converting F into a corporation, and entered into a partnership agreement with G and H to hold 1/2 shares, respectively, according to the said partnership agreement.
(2) The trade name as of July 6, 200 was changed. (2)
Meanwhile, the Plaintiff completed each registration of transfer on February 5, 2001 as to the entire shares in G (land: 2,500/10,675, factory: 1/4) among them on March 5, 2001, registered in the name of G, I, J, and K, while the Plaintiff completed each registration of transfer on February 5, 2001, with respect to the entire shares in G (land: 2,500/10,675, factory: 1/4).
2. As to the appeal of the instant case filed by the Defendant on April 20, 201, the Plaintiff asserts that there is a serious defect in the resolution of the general meeting of shareholders to appoint the Defendant’s representative director and the resolution of the board of directors to be appointed as the representative director, each of the above resolutions is nonexistent or null, and L, appointed by such resolution, is not entitled to represent the Defendant, and that the appeal of the instant subsequent appeal filed by non-representative L, is unlawful. Even if L, which appears to be legally elected as the Defendant’s representative director on April 20, 2012, is not entitled to represent the Defendant, H, who appears to be present on the sixth day of the trial of the first instance on January 18, 2013, and thereafter files an appeal of subsequent completion.