株主總會決議의 效力을 다투는 訴의 訴訟物

Abstract

The Korean Commercial Code prescribes three procedures of the lawsuit to illegal general meetings of shareholders. Those are actions for cancellation, nullity, and non-existence. A man who wants to raise a lawsuit against company must select the way of a action from those three procedures. That selection is very complicated and difficult especially to an ordinary person (shareholders). The theory about unified object of a lawsuit to illegal general meeting of shareholders is a practicable theory for ordinary person (shareholders) to raise a lawsuit against company. By that theory, those person (shareholders) who want to raise a lawsuit against company can describe the gist of claim comprehensively. Then the court will vindicate the case suitably. The judgment of the Korean Supreme Court (2001다45584) is probably upholding the theory about unified object of lawsuit (not exactly correspond to that). That judgment doesn't correspond to precedents about the object of a lawsuit, called old theory about the object of a lawsuit. To my view, the new judgment is more suitable than old precedents. There are several shortcomings in the theory about unified object of a lawsuit. For example, by that theory, because the effect of excluding further litigation is wide, unpredictable effect will be imposed to the person concerned in the case. So it is desirable that the effect of excluding further litigation will be restrained within plaintiff's anticipation.