2. Plaintiffs A and C-.

A. On November 8, 1974, I (hereinafter “the deceased”) established and operated the Defendant Company, and died on June 6, 1997. At the time of the death, I not only 45,00 shares (ordinary shares) issued by the Defendant Company, but also 5,00 shares (J 13,30 shares, K 13,300 shares, L 13,700 shares, G 9,100 shares, M 5,60 shares, and hereinafter “the shares of this case”) were trusted by I to the above persons.

B. The deceased’s legal heir was wife N, children, E, andO, but O continued to operate the above company on June 7, 1997 and continued to operate the company until the closing date of the argument in this case.

On the other hand, according to the intention of theO on April 30, 1999, the title holder of the said 27,000 shares among the shares of this case in the name of K and L was changed to H.

C. The Defendant Company issued 30,00 shares on September 29, 200; and 1,000 shares on May 20, 201 (hereinafter “instant issuance”); and the Plaintiff Company held 7,00 shares of the Defendant Company as of the date of the closing of argument in the instant case.

[Basis] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1, 2, 4, 5, Gap's evidence 3-1 to 4, Gap's evidence 10-1 to 12, Gap's evidence 13-1 to 14, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs claim confirmation of non-existence of issuance of new shares in each of the instant cases asserted that there was no external appearance of the issuance of new shares due to the failure of the board of directors' resolution, peremptory notice to the preemptive right holder, payment of stock price, etc. under the Commercial Act. The plaintiffs claim confirmation of invalidity of 31,000 shares stated in the defendant's list and corporate register as stated in the purport of seeking confirmation of non-existence of issuance of new shares.

If it is treated as a lawsuit to confirm the invalidity of issuance of new shares, the exclusion period.