2...

A. Defendant B is registered as a shareholder of the shares listed in Section 1 of the attached Table issued by Company D (hereinafter “D”), and Defendant C is registered as a shareholder of the shares listed in Section 2 of the attached Table.

B. Each of the above shares was paid by the Plaintiff, but only the name of the shareholder in the shareholder registry pursuant to the title trust agreement with the Defendants was left in the future of the Defendants.

C. The Plaintiff terminated the title trust agreement on the instant shares with the service of the instant complaint, and the said warden served each of the Defendants C on October 10, 2018, and on October 12, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Each entry in Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including a tentative number), and judgment as to the ground for appeal as a whole of the pleadings

A. According to the above facts, according to the title trust agreement concluded with the Plaintiff with respect to the instant shares, the Defendants are merely a shareholder registered only in the form of the D’s shareholder registry, and the rights to the instant shares were returned to the Plaintiff upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the title trust.

B. As examined below, insofar as the Defendants asserted the acquisition of prescription as examined below, and are dissatisfied with the Plaintiff’s claim, the Plaintiff is also entitled to legal benefits against the Defendants seeking confirmation of their shareholders’ rights.

Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants acknowledged that they lent the name of each of the shares listed in the separate sheet from the Plaintiff. However, the Defendants asserted that they are shareholders of each of the above shares by acquiring extinctive prescription, since each of the above shares was not less than 10 years since the period specified in

(B) In addition, the defendant C is an employee who has worked for a long time in D, and the plaintiff's husband, the representative director of D, who is the plaintiff's husband, stated that E will return to the worker's interest if it is well-being, and therefore, the above shares are one of the workers.