logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2014.02.19 2011가합11276
건축주명의변경
Text

1. The instant lawsuit was terminated by the withdrawal of the suit filed on July 18, 2012.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the request for setting the date.

Reasons

1. At the time of filing the instant lawsuit before and after the filing of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit, the representative director appointed D as a legal representative and submitted the instant complaint on December 14, 201. On or around February 2012, the Plaintiff’s legal representative resigned from the said attorney D and then changed to E law firm. On June 2012, the Plaintiff’s legal representative filed an application for correction of the Plaintiff’s indication that corrected the Plaintiff’s representative director as F. Meanwhile, during the instant lawsuit, the representative director on the Plaintiff’s corporate register was changed to G around January 18, 2012 and the registration was changed to F on or around May 9, 2012; the registration was completed on or around July 6, 2012; the representative director on the Plaintiff’s corporate register submitted the Plaintiff’s written withdrawal notice to the court on July 18, 2012 (hereinafter “the withdrawal of the lawsuit”). Meanwhile, it is evident that the Plaintiff’s legal representative on or around July 27, 2012.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment on the validity of the withdrawal of the lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff asserted that, in collusion with the Defendant, H et al. forged relevant documents, such as the Plaintiff’s shareholder registry, and submitted the written withdrawal of the instant lawsuit as the representative director, which constitutes the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering, etc., and thus, the establishment of the instant lawsuit has no effect.

In a case where the withdrawal of a lawsuit was caused by another person's act subject to criminal punishment, the reason under Article 451 (1) 5 of the Civil Procedure Act may be inferred by analogy for the revocation of invalidation (see Supreme Court Decision 82Meu312, Sept. 24, 1985). In such a case, another person shall be punished.

arrow