2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion and defense 1) each of the shares listed in the separate sheet of the Plaintiff’s assertion (hereinafter “instant shares”)

(2) In order to secure the Plaintiff’s loan obligation, the Plaintiff was provided as a security for transfer to Defendant B and D, and the Defendant C was held in title trust. However, on January 2013, the Plaintiff extinguished the secured debt by paying the loan to Defendant B and D, and there is no effect of the transfer of security for each of the shares in the instant case’s shares, and the Plaintiff expressed his intention to terminate the title trust agreement with Defendant C around January 18, 2013, the instant shares are the Plaintiff’s rights to the instant shares. Therefore, the Plaintiff is seeking confirmation that the instant shares were owned by the Plaintiff. (2) The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff raised an objection against the tax burden, such as securities transaction tax and transfer income tax, prior to the instant shares acquisition, and that this part of the lawsuit for confirmation is unlawful as the Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the ownership of the instant shares.

B. In a lawsuit for confirmation of confirmation, there must be interests in confirmation. This is to be recognized only when it is the most effective and appropriate means to obtain a judgment of confirmation against the Defendants, in order to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status in danger, and its apprehension and danger.

On January 18, 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendants concluded a transfer contract on the instant shares (No. 1, 2, and 3). The Defendants received KRW 1.1 billion from the Plaintiff due to the implementation thereof.

(A) According to this, the shares of this case are owned by the plaintiff, and the defendants do not dispute this. Thus, the plaintiff does not dispute this.