메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국경영법률학회 경영법률 경영법률 제18권 제1호
발행연도
2007.1
수록면
83 - 111 (29page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
【Abstract】 The Supreme Court Judgment to Void the Election Resolution in Shareholders' Meeting and the Effect of Registration by the Application of False Facts Jae-Bum Kim In recent case the Supreme Court held that 1. when a court decided to void the election resolution of shareholders' meeting, then the chief director who had been elected by the directors composed on that resolution would loose his or her status retroactively to the resolution time and the acts of chief director which were done before that decision become void, 2. even the resolution would become void retroactively from the time of resolution, the third party who made a contract with the chief director can be protected by the application of Commercial Law § 39. In that case a chief director was elected through the insufficient quorum of resolution and he had a contract with some one. Through the contract corporate real estate was finally transferred to defendant. After the deal the legal director sued to void the resolution and to recover the corporate real estate. The Supreme Court decision has some irrational points, but rational in the sense that the innocent third party was protected. The decision is made first since the article of Commercial Law(§376) was amended in 1995. The article has been amended to permit a court to construe the article to the effect that the decision of voiding resolution has retroactivity. The lower court stated that the court decision on defectively formed resolution has no retroactivity, but the Supreme Court definitively stressed that the decision has retroactivity. The Court stated when a court decide to void the resolution, the section 39 can apply to the third party. According to this section, registration applicant who applied for registration by a false fact should be responsible for the third party who believe the content of registration to be correspond to the fact. I think that the Supreme Court didn't reason fully in that one requirement of the section 39 was not mentioned. That is the requirement of registration applicant's responsibilities. This case is not typical one to which the section 39 applies, however the section can be applied in the point that the legal chief director had knowledge of falsely registering through defectively formed resolution or of the existence of such registration. He was responsible for that registration and the registration became the base of the belief of third party when he made a contract with the illegally elected chief director whose name and office had been formally registered.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0