A. The Defendant purchased KRW 200,000 (hereinafter “instant shares”) out of the shares of Hart Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Lart”) owned by the deceased from the network D (the deceased, Jun. 17, 2014; hereinafter “the deceased”) at KRW 20,00,000 (hereinafter “instant shares”) from the shares of Hart Co., Ltd. (the “Lart”) held by the deceased. However, at the deceased’s request, the Defendant suspended the change of ownership and had the deceased manage the instant shares under title trust.

B. Around April 2005, Hart acquired and merged with the Hong Kong metropolitan private equity fund (AEP) and during this process, Hart’s shares were sold in public in KRW 340,000 per share, and the Deceased was paid KRW 6.12 million per share on April 6, 2005 by converting the shares of this case, including the shares of this case, and the shares of 180,000 per share, which were held in its name (i.e., KRW 18,00 per share x KRW 340,00 per share).

C. (1) On May 4, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the deceased on the following grounds: (a) on the ground that the instant shares were sold publicly as seen above, the deceased’s obligation to return the instant shares to the Defendant was impossible; and (b) the deceased incurred losses equivalent to the proceeds from the sale of the instant shares; (c) the first instance court and the appellate court (Seoul District Court Decision 2012Gahap5005, Daejeon High Court 2013Na544) decided that the deceased’s obligation to return the instant shares was impossible; (d) on February 26, 2015, the Supreme Court (Supreme Court Decision 2014Da37040) did not hold the deceased’s shares solely on the ground that the deceased’s obligation to return the instant shares was not a specific obligation, but a specific obligation, and thus, the deceased’s obligation to return shares cannot be deemed to have been fulfilled.