beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The fact that the registration of transfer of a mining right in the Defendant’s future (hereinafter “registration of transfer of a mining right in this case”) was made on November 30, 2009 on the grounds of a sale contract on the same day as indicated in the attached list registered in the name of the Plaintiff of the basic facts (hereinafter “instant mining right”) is not in dispute between the parties.
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On November 2009, the Plaintiff sold the instant mining right in KRW 300 million to the Defendant and completed the registration of transfer of the said mining right on November 30, 2009. However, since the Defendant’s cancellation of the said sale contract on the grounds that the purchase price was unpaid, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancelling the registration of transfer of the said mining right.
B. In addition, the transfer of the mining right of this case constitutes the transfer of all or part of the Plaintiff’s business, and thus, it did not undergo a special resolution of the general meeting of shareholders pursuant to Articles 374 and 434 of the Commercial Act, so the said transfer of the mining right is null
3. Determination
A. We examine whether the transfer registration of the mining right of this case on November 30, 2009 based on the purchase price of KRW 300 million as alleged by the Plaintiff regarding the Plaintiff’s claim for the purchase and sale of the mining right, as well as whether the transfer registration of the mining right of this case was based on the purchase price of KRW 300 million. The Plaintiff’s assertion for the cancellation of the contract based on this premise is without merit, in light of the following circumstances, which can be known by adding the whole purport of the pleadings as stated in the evidence No. 3-1, No. 2, and No. 7 through No. 9, and the evidence No. 3-1, No. 3-2 and the above evidence alone are insufficient to acknowledge the fact that the purchase and sale contract of KRW 300 million was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.
(1) The Plaintiff filed an application for permission to extract aggregate with public officials from Chang-gun on August 2008, but was dismissed on January 2009.