天津某教育公司(si)訴上海某泵(beng)業公司(si)等股(gu)東出資糾紛案-瑕疵股(gu)東主張抽逃(tao)股(gu)東返還出資的認定標準
人民法院案(an)例庫 入庫編號：2023-08-2-265-002
關鍵詞
民事/股東出資(zi)/瑕疵股東/抽逃(tao)出資(zi)/主體資(zi)格/返還出資(zi)/連(lian)帶責任(ren)
基本案情
天津某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)司(si)訴(su)稱：天津某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)司(si)通(tong)過司(si)法(fa)拍賣(mai)從上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)創業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)處(chu)取得上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)10%股(gu)份(fen)并經法(fa)院(yuan)生(sheng)效(xiao)裁定(ding)確認所有權。經查上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)涉訴(su)信息發(fa)現，法(fa)院(yuan)生(sheng)效(xiao)判(pan)決認定(ding)上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)泵業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)及其(qi)他八家股(gu)東抽(chou)逃出(chu)資并將其(qi)追加為(wei)被執行人。可(ke)見，上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)泵業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)構成抽(chou)逃出(chu)資，應(ying)當返(fan)還出(chu)資；林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)作(zuo)為(wei)上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)董(dong)事(shi)長(chang)、董(dong)事(shi)，協(xie)助上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)泵業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)抽(chou)逃出(chu)資，應(ying)當承擔(dan)連帶(dai)責任(ren)(ren)。請求判(pan)令：1.上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)泵業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)向上海(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)返(fan)還其(qi)抽(chou)逃出(chu)資600萬元；2.林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)就上述訴(su)訟請求承擔(dan)連帶(dai)責任(ren)(ren)。
上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)泵業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)、林某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)辯稱，天津某(mou)(mou)教育公(gong)(gong)司(si)不具有股(gu)東資格(ge)身份，無(wu)權提出(chu)本案訴訟。天津某(mou)(mou)教育公(gong)(gong)司(si)通(tong)過拍賣(mai)方式繼受(shou)取(qu)得股(gu)權，但未按協議內(nei)容(rong)辦(ban)理工商變更登記手(shou)續(xu)，在知(zhi)道轉讓方上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)創業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)也抽(chou)逃(tao)出(chu)資的情況下，并未向上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司(si)履行出(chu)資義務。上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司(si)自2016年(nian)之后不再經營并辦(ban)理相關工商變更手(shou)續(xu)，其權益并未受(shou)到侵(qin)害。林某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)非本案適格(ge)被告，沒有證據(ju)證明(ming)其協助抽(chou)逃(tao)出(chu)資。
上(shang)海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公司(si)述稱，當時股東都(dou)沒有(you)出資，天津某(mou)(mou)教育公司(si)要求上(shang)海(hai)某(mou)(mou)泵(beng)業公司(si)返還抽逃的出資不合理。上(shang)海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公司(si)經(jing)(jing)營時由上(shang)海(hai)某(mou)(mou)創業公司(si)管理，自2012年起未(wei)再經(jing)(jing)營，目(mu)前(qian)也無負債。
法院經審理查明：上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司成(cheng)立時有包(bao)括上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)泵(beng)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司、上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)創(chuang)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司在內的(de)九名股東(dong)(dong)。成(cheng)立前，九名股東(dong)(dong)收到案(an)外人上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)發(fa)展(zhan)公(gong)(gong)司匯(hui)款(kuan)共計(ji)6,000萬元(yuan)，當(dang)日即(ji)分別轉(zhuan)匯(hui)至上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司賬(zhang)戶，以(yi)貨幣出資形(xing)式(shi)繳足(zu)上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司的(de)注(zhu)(zhu)冊(ce)資本(ben)6,000萬元(yuan)。其中上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)創(chuang)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司匯(hui)入注(zhu)(zhu)冊(ce)資本(ben)600萬元(yuan)，上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)泵(beng)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)司匯(hui)入了注(zhu)(zhu)冊(ce)資本(ben)1,200萬元(yuan)整。成(cheng)立后兩天左右，所有股東(dong)(dong)再(zai)以(yi)本(ben)票(piao)形(xing)式(shi)分別將(jiang)6,000萬元(yuan)的(de)注(zhu)(zhu)冊(ce)資本(ben)由上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)司賬(zhang)戶轉(zhuan)回上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)(hai)(hai)某(mou)(mou)(mou)發(fa)展(zhan)公(gong)(gong)司賬(zhang)戶。
后，上(shang)海某小貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)因涉訴被申(shen)請強制執(zhi)(zhi)行，法(fa)院(yuan)追加上(shang)海某泵(beng)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)等為(wei)共(gong)同被執(zhi)(zhi)行人，上(shang)海某泵(beng)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)所繳代管款被法(fa)院(yuan)劃(hua)扣。上(shang)海某創(chuang)(chuang)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)進(jin)入破產(chan)清算程序，名下上(shang)海某小貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)10％股(gu)(gu)權(quan)被法(fa)院(yuan)裁(cai)定歸買(mai)受(shou)人天津某教育公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)所有(you)(you)。雙方(fang)協議約定：轉讓標的(de)(de)為(wei)上(shang)海某創(chuang)(chuang)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)合法(fa)持(chi)有(you)(you)的(de)(de)上(shang)海某小貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)10％的(de)(de)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)（對(dui)應注冊資本(ben)為(wei)600萬元），轉讓股(gu)(gu)權(quan)包括對(dui)應的(de)(de)所有(you)(you)權(quan)利和(he)利益。本(ben)次交(jiao)易系在司(si)(si)(si)(si)法(fa)拍賣平臺以1元價(jia)(jia)格變賣進(jin)行，天津某教育公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)對(dui)標的(de)(de)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)及(ji)(ji)目(mu)標公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)的(de)(de)現狀及(ji)(ji)瑕疵均(jun)明知并自愿接受(shou)，成(cheng)交(jiao)價(jia)(jia)為(wei)16,000元。雙方(fang)確認以法(fa)院(yuan)作出(chu)破產(chan)裁(cai)定之日為(wei)標的(de)(de)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)的(de)(de)交(jiao)割日。
另查明，林某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)系上(shang)海某(mou)(mou)泵業公司(si)的(de)法定代表人，兼上(shang)海某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公司(si)董事(shi)長。2016年，上(shang)海某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公司(si)關于取消本市(shi)小(xiao)(xiao)(xiao)額貸(dai)款公司(si)試點資(zi)格的(de)申請被(bei)相(xiang)關部門批復同意，不得開(kai)展新的(de)小(xiao)(xiao)(xiao)額貸(dai)款業務。
上海(hai)市(shi)閔行(xing)區人民法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)于(yu)2021年9月(yue)(yue)26日作出（2021）滬0112民初19563號民事(shi)判(pan)(pan)決(jue)(jue)：駁(bo)回(hui)天津某(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)司的訴訟請求。宣判(pan)(pan)后，天津某(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)司不(bu)服一(yi)審判(pan)(pan)決(jue)(jue)，提(ti)起(qi)(qi)上訴。上海(hai)市(shi)第一(yi)中級人民法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)于(yu)2022年6月(yue)(yue)30日作出（2021）滬01民終(zhong)14513號民事(shi)判(pan)(pan)決(jue)(jue): 一(yi)、撤銷上海(hai)市(shi)閔行(xing)區人民法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)（2021）滬0112民初19563號民事(shi)判(pan)(pan)決(jue)(jue)；二(er)、上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)泵(beng)業公(gong)(gong)司于(yu)判(pan)(pan)決(jue)(jue)生(sheng)效之日起(qi)(qi)十(shi)日內向上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小貸公(gong)(gong)司返還出資600萬元；三(san)、駁(bo)回(hui)天津某(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)司的其余訴訟請求。
裁判理由
法院生效裁判認為，本案主要爭議是(shi)：第一(yi)，天津某教育公司(si)是(shi)否(fou)有(you)權主張上海某泵(beng)業公司(si)向(xiang)上海某小貸(dai)公司(si)返還(huan)抽逃出資(zi)；第二，林某某應否(fou)承擔連帶(dai)責任。
一、天津(jin)某(mou)教育公(gong)司是否有(you)權主張上海(hai)某(mou)泵業公(gong)司向(xiang)上海(hai)某(mou)小(xiao)貸公(gong)司返還抽逃出資
首先，上(shang)海某(mou)泵業公司(si)通過(guo)第(di)(di)三方代墊出資并將(jiang)其出資抽回的(de)行為并未經過(guo)法定(ding)程序，屬于《最高(gao)人(ren)民法院關于適用(yong)〈中(zhong)華人(ren)民共(gong)和國(guo)公司(si)法〉若干問題的(de)規定(ding)（三）》（以下簡(jian)稱《公司(si)法司(si)法解釋三》）第(di)(di)十(shi)二條(tiao)(tiao)第(di)(di)一條(tiao)(tiao)第(di)(di)（四(si)）項規定(ding)的(de)情形，構成抽逃出資。另案生(sheng)效裁定(ding)也對此進行認定(ding)。
其次，天津(jin)某(mou)教育公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)通過法(fa)院公(gong)(gong)開拍賣獲得上海某(mou)創業公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)持(chi)有(you)(you)的(de)上海某(mou)小(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)10％股權并支(zhi)付股權轉讓(rang)款，所有(you)(you)權已獲生效裁定確認(ren)，應享有(you)(you)上海某(mou)小(xiao)貸公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)股東權利，根據《公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)法(fa)司(si)(si)法(fa)解釋三》第十四條規(gui)定，有(you)(you)權提起本案訴訟(song)。
再(zai)次，即(ji)便受讓的(de)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)有瑕(xia)疵(ci)，天津某(mou)教育(yu)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)作為股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)仍有權(quan)請求(qiu)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)的(de)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)泵業公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)向上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)返還全(quan)部出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)（需扣(kou)除(chu)上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)泵業公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)已(yi)因抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)被法(fa)院執行(xing)(xing)(xing)并(bing)劃扣(kou)以(yi)清償上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)對外債(zhai)務的(de)款項金額）。理(li)由(you)如(ru)下(xia)：第(di)(di)一，法(fa)律沒(mei)有明確規定《公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)法(fa)司(si)(si)(si)法(fa)解釋(shi)三(san)》第(di)(di)十(shi)四(si)條中(zhong)(zhong)的(de)其(qi)他(ta)(ta)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)應限定為守約股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)。從(cong)促(cu)進公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)充(chong)(chong)實的(de)目的(de)看，也(ye)不(bu)應將抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)受讓瑕(xia)疵(ci)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)的(de)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)排(pai)除(chu)在該(gai)法(fa)條中(zhong)(zhong)請求(qiu)其(qi)他(ta)(ta)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)向公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)返還出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)息的(de)其(qi)他(ta)(ta)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)之(zhi)外。對未(wei)履(lv)(lv)行(xing)(xing)(xing)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)義(yi)(yi)務或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)的(de)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)提起股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)訴訟(song)是(shi)(shi)法(fa)律賦予其(qi)他(ta)(ta)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)的(de)權(quan)利(li)，對該(gai)條中(zhong)(zhong)其(qi)他(ta)(ta)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)的(de)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)格進行(xing)(xing)(xing)限縮，與公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)制度不(bu)符(fu)。第(di)(di)二(er)，全(quan)體(ti)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)都有向公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)的(de)義(yi)(yi)務，該(gai)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)并(bing)非股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)之(zhi)間(jian)的(de)對待給付，權(quan)利(li)主(zhu)體(ti)是(shi)(shi)上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)小(xiao)(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)，包括(kuo)上(shang)(shang)海(hai)(hai)某(mou)泵業公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)在內(nei)的(de)任(ren)一股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)均不(bu)得(de)以(yi)對方未(wei)履(lv)(lv)行(xing)(xing)(xing)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)義(yi)(yi)務或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)受讓之(zhi)股(gu)(gu)權(quan)存在瑕(xia)疵(ci)為由(you)拒絕履(lv)(lv)行(xing)(xing)(xing)自(zi)身的(de)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)義(yi)(yi)務。第(di)(di)三(san)，股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)侵害的(de)是(shi)(shi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)財產權(quan)益，股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)行(xing)(xing)(xing)使出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)請求(qiu)權(quan)屬(shu)于(yu)共益權(quan)范疇。況且，從(cong)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)維(wei)持(chi)的(de)角(jiao)度來看，未(wei)履(lv)(lv)行(xing)(xing)(xing)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)義(yi)(yi)務或(huo)者(zhe)(zhe)抽(chou)(chou)逃出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)的(de)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)之(zhi)間(jian)互相(xiang)催繳出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)，有利(li)于(yu)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)充(chong)(chong)實。第(di)(di)四(si)，股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)的(de)出資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)義(yi)(yi)務具(ju)有法(fa)定性，公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)維(wei)持(chi)是(shi)(shi)股(gu)(gu)東(dong)(dong)(dong)(dong)承擔有限責任(ren)的(de)基(ji)礎，公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)資(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)(zi)本(ben)(ben)缺失顯然(ran)會降低公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)的(de)履(lv)(lv)約能力和償債(zhai)能力，故不(bu)應以(yi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)意(yi)志予以(yi)免除(chu)。
二、林(lin)某某應否(fou)對上海某泵業公(gong)司的(de)返(fan)還出資(zi)義務承(cheng)擔(dan)連帶責任
上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)泵業公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)作為上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)股東，其(qi)抽(chou)逃(tao)出(chu)資(zi)侵犯了公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)財產權。如果公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)其(qi)他股東、董(dong)事(shi)(shi)、高級(ji)管理人(ren)(ren)員(yuan)或者實(shi)際(ji)控(kong)制人(ren)(ren)協助抽(chou)逃(tao)出(chu)資(zi)，則構成共同侵權，應與(yu)上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)泵業公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)承擔連帶責任。但據(ju)(ju)上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)企(qi)業公(gong)(gong)(gong)示信息顯示，林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)雖(sui)系(xi)(xi)上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)董(dong)事(shi)(shi)長，但并非(fei)法定代表人(ren)(ren)，現(xian)有證(zheng)據(ju)(ju)也不能(neng)證(zheng)明(ming)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)系(xi)(xi)上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)實(shi)際(ji)控(kong)制人(ren)(ren)或者上海(hai)某(mou)(mou)小(xiao)貸(dai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)發(fa)起(qi)設立時(shi)通過案(an)外(wai)人(ren)(ren)代墊驗資(zi)事(shi)(shi)宜系(xi)(xi)由林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)經辦，因此，天津某(mou)(mou)教(jiao)育(yu)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)主張林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)協助抽(chou)逃(tao)出(chu)資(zi)缺乏事(shi)(shi)實(shi)依據(ju)(ju)。
裁判要旨
股東抽逃出資侵害的是目標公司財產權益，公司其他股東依據《公司法司法解釋三》第十四條行使出資請求權屬于共益權范疇，目的是維持公司資本，對該法條中行使出資請求權的“其他股東”進行限縮與公司資本制度也不符。即便行權股東自身出資存在瑕疵，或公司明確表示無需返還，從出資責任、請求權性質、價值選擇三個方面考慮，抽逃出資的股東也不能以此主張免除自己的返還義務。在(zai)公司尚未經法定清算、清償(chang)債權債務的(de)情況下(xia)，為保障公司債權人的(de)合法權益，股東抽(chou)逃的(de)公司資本仍需補足，可主張返(fan)還(huan)出資的(de)主體應包括(kuo)所有(you)股東。
關聯索引
《中華人民(min)共和國公司法》第(di)91條
《最高(gao)人(ren)民法院關于適用〈中(zhong)華人(ren)民共和(he)國(guo)公司(si)法〉若干問題的規(gui)定（三）》第14條(tiao)
《最高人民法院關于適用〈中華人民共和國民事訴訟法〉的解釋》第90條
一審：上海市(shi)閔行區人民法院（2021）滬0112民初19563號民事判(pan)決(jue)（2021年9月26日）
二審：上(shang)海市第一中級人民法院(yuan)（2021）滬01民終14513號民事判(pan)決（2022年6月30日(ri)）
