1. It is confirmed that the Defendant did not have a shareholder’s right regarding the share certificates stated in the attached Form “share Certificates”.

1. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. On May 2014, the Plaintiffs received a share certificate (hereinafter “instant share certificate”) indicated in the attached Form “share Certificates” held by the Defendant from the Defendant as a means of transfer for a loan (hereinafter “instant share certificate”).

B. The Plaintiffs intended to collect a loan by disposing of the instant share certificates in which they had no interest on the loan, and applied for a false public summons on September 11, 2014, stating that “The instant share certificates were lost among the Dos to which the office was relocated” was to prevent the Defendant from doing so.

The plaintiffs, who became aware of this fact, reported their rights to the court, and accordingly, the court rendered a judgment of nullification with respect to the right reservation that "the plaintiffs shall withhold their rights reported on the stock certificates of this case and declare the invalidity of the deed."

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Kano911 Decided February 9, 2015 (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2014Kano911).

However, upon filing an application for a public summons, the Defendant filed a report on the loss of the instant share certificates with the Korea Stock Exchange. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs are at a disadvantage in failing to dispose of the instant share certificates despite the above nullification judgment, and it is necessary to confirm that the Defendant has no right to the instant share certificates to resolve this disadvantage.

Therefore, the Defendant seeks confirmation as to the fact that the instant share certificates do not have shareholder rights.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the respective descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 13 (including paper numbers) and the purport of the entire pleadings, the plaintiffs' above arguments can be admitted as they are.

(B) The defendant only submitted a formal reply, but did not specifically dispute the plaintiffs' assertion.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims shall be accepted with due reason, and it is so decided as per Disposition.