The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the lower court held that the Plaintiff kept the instant share certificates to the Defendant.
There is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff concluded an agreement on the safekeeping of the instant share certificates, there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff acquired the right to request the return of the instant share certificates, and since the certificate of the custody of the instant share certificates cannot be deemed as constituting securities, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as holding the right to request the return of the instant share certificates against the Defendant.
In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on the probative value of securities or disposal documents, and the exercise of the right to explanation, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby adversely affecting
2. As to the ground of appeal No. 4, the Defendant expressed its intent to a third party through the certificate of stock certificates custody, and the Plaintiff expressed its intent to make profits to the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s obligation to return the instant stock certificates to the Plaintiff cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal due to a new argument in the final appeal.
3. As to the ground of appeal No. 5, this part of the ground of appeal is merely an error in the selection of evidence and fact-finding which belong to the court below's exclusive jurisdiction, and it cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.
4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.