In June of the Republic of China (the same below), Changhua Bank (hereinafter referred to as Changyin) issued special shares for cash capital increase through private bidding and public bidding. Financial institutions were consolidated, and in July of the same year, they expressed their support for the winning investor in obtaining the operating rights of Changyin in a press release and letter (hereinafter referred to as the agreement in dispute) , and agreed to transfer the operating rights of Changyin to Changyin after the completion of the capital increase. winning investors .
Taishin Financial Holdings won the bid for telemarketing list Changyin's capital increase and private placement . In the subsequent years of Changyin's re-election of directors and supervisors in 1994, 1997 and 100, Taishin Financial Holdings successfully won more than half of the seats. 1 Photo Credit: Falun Gong However, on the eve of Zhangyin's re-election as a director in 2013, the Ministry of Finance not only refused to agree with Taishin Financial Holdings to allocate director seats, Yuanta Securities also actively solicited the collection of proxy letters from other shareholders, and voted for the director candidates appointed by the Ministry of Finance.
In the second re-election, Taishin Financial Holdings only won 1/3 of the board of directors and lost the right to operate Changyin. Taishin Financial Holding believed that the Ministry of Finance did not abide by the disputed agreement, and in 103 years, angrily requested the court to confirm the existence of the contractual relationship between the two companies, reassign Changyin as a director, and so on. What is the dispute in this case? What is a shareholder voting rights binding contract?