beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. Defendant Company is a company engaged in construction business, railroad track construction business, etc., and C was a shareholder and representative director who actually holds all 170,000 shares issued by Defendant Company.
B. On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff and D entered into a contract to acquire the management right of the Defendant Company in the form of purchasing KRW 2,639,760,000 per share of KRW 170,00 per share of KRW 15,528 per share from C, and paid KRW 450,000 as the down payment on the same day. The main contents are as shown in the attached Form.
C. Meanwhile, in a separate agreement attached to the instant transfer agreement, the total amount of the price actually paid out of the transfer price shall be KRW 2 billion, and the down payment shall be KRW 450 million on January 29, 2016, and the same year.
2. Before January 28, 200, the first intermediate payment of KRW 300 million, the second intermediate payment of KRW 750 million, and the remainder of KRW 500 million until January 30, 2017 were agreed to pay by the end of the same year.
[Reasons for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 5, 6, Eul 1 through 3, purport of the whole pleadings]
2. On January 29, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with C to acquire 170,000 shares of the Defendant Company, and paid part of the purchase price. C had the Plaintiff enter into an employment contract with the Defendant Company for KRW 60,000 on the pretext that C would have the Plaintiff grasp the management status of the Defendant Company before receiving the full acquisition of the Defendant Company.
The Plaintiff, according to C’s instruction, opened a separate Seoul Office of the Defendant Company and worked there at the same time, and C did not perform at all the obligations under the contract. On June 21, 2017, the Plaintiff rescinded the instant transfer agreement.
The defendant company unilaterally closed the Seoul Office around June 30, 2017, and the plaintiff lost its status as employee of the defendant company. Thus, the defendant company lost its status as employee of the defendant company.