2024-06-12 07:30:26
Singer Kim Ho-joong’s company, Saesang Leisure, defined the suspicions of unlawful acquisition of shares. As well as, comic Han-Bae Kim and former co-CEO of Saeng Saeng Leisure, Yeon-Ho Jeong, filed a lawsuit making these claims and introduced, “We are going to maintain them legally accountable.”
Saengsaeng Leisure stated on the tenth, “We confirmed that on the twenty ninth of final month, Mr. Kim and one different individual filed a lawsuit in opposition to the corporate to adjust to the identify switch process,” and added, “We have now filed a lawsuit relating to legal litigation fraud and knowledge and communication community safety associated to the false claims and lawsuit filed by Mr. Kim and others.” We plan to take authorized motion for violating the legislation (defamation). “We will even be held chargeable for damages arising from unlawful acts,” he introduced on the tenth.
Considering Leisure stated, “Mr. Kim and others said of their criticism that they have been shareholders of the corporate, however trying on the circumstances wherein the shareholders have been modified to another person’s identify, they assumed that their shares have been illegally transferred to somebody, and didn’t current a single particular proof.” It was not even clear who the one who had transferred the shares of was. “They said that they might acquire proof after submitting a lawsuit based mostly solely on hypothesis, however that is an unlawful type of litigation that’s not permitted by the Civil Process Act and could possibly be suspected of litigation fraud,” he identified.
Beforehand, the net media The Truth reported that Mr. Kim and Mr. Jeong filed a criticism with Gangnam Police Station in Seoul in opposition to three executives, together with Saeng Saeng Leisure CEO Lee Gwang-deuk, on expenses of fraud, forgery of personal paperwork, and companionship beneath the Aggravated Punishment Act for Particular Financial Crimes.
In line with the report, the plaintiffs declare that they have been “compelled to signal the inventory switch settlement with out prior data of inventory fluctuations,” and that “unlawful modifications have been made.”
In relation to this, Saengsaeng Leisure said, “The claims made by Mr. Kim and others are utterly groundless and false.” They level out that even if a inventory firm with property exceeding tens of billions of gained didn’t notify Mr. Kim and others of the convening of shareholders’ conferences by means of a number of normal shareholders’ conferences, ▲there has not been a single objection raised; ▲there was no evaluation of the shareholder record or shareholder assembly. It was based mostly on the truth that there was no request to the corporate relating to the method by which the record was modified, and that there was no request for the corporate to alter the shareholder record earlier than submitting the civil go well with on this case.
Saengsaeng Leisure stated, “The inventory switch contract is concluded between the transferor and the transferee, and the corporate can’t be concerned within the conclusion of the inventory switch contract. Fee of capital positive factors tax and inventory alternate certificates should even be borne and reported by the transferor, Mr. Kim, and so forth., not the corporate. “I do it,” he stated.
He continued, “We can’t know the state of affairs as we’ve got no involvement in how the inventory switch contract was concluded or whether or not capital positive factors tax and securities transaction tax have been paid,” and “The corporate requested that the transferor and transferee, who’re current shareholders, notify the corporate and request a inventory switch.” In that case, the one obligation is to examine the authenticity and alter the shareholder record. “The corporate isn’t obligated to hold out the title switch process itself,” he defined.
On the similar time, “Mr. Kim and others are making claims to the impact that the corporate was concerned within the technique of concluding the inventory switch settlement and falsified the contract, and so forth., however these are false claims with none understanding of the fundamental authorized construction and procedures of the inventory switch settlement.” He stated, “It’s a clear legal act that damages the corporate’s status and credibility. He identified, “It’s uncertain whether or not they’re attempting to achieve unfair earnings by profiting from the state of affairs wherein the corporate’s artist (Kim Ho-joong) is dealing with difficulties on the verge of closure by turning the corporate and its present shareholders into an immoral legal group.”
Jo Yoo-kyung, Donga.com reporter [email protected]
-
- nice
- 0canine
-
- I am so unhappy
- 0canine
-
- I am indignant
- 0canine
-
- I like to recommend it
- canine
Scorching information now
2024-06-12 07:30:26