1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a financial agent of the Hong Kong corporations, namely, the Hong Kong corporations, that purchased 400,000 shares issued by the Defendant under the name of BMH on December 2009. BMH sold it to C on February 26, 2010, and thereafter, on April 3, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased 400,000 shares from C as above from April 3, 2015.

However, as of June 4, 2015, there are no shares in the name of Defendant Company C in the name of the Defendant Company’s shareholder registry, and shares remaining in the name of BMH exist 210,000 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”). As the purchaser of the instant shares, the Plaintiff has the right to file a claim for the change of ownership of the instant shares remaining in the name of BMH. As such, the Defendant is obligated to implement the transfer procedure to change the name of the shareholder in the shareholder registry to the Plaintiff.

B. According to the response of the order to submit financial transaction information to the National Bank of this Court on August 7, 2015, the defendant is found to have issued the stock certificates of this case around July 2014, which was prior to the sales contract of this case. Thus, the plaintiff as the owner of this case's stock, must present the stock certificates to the defendant in order to exercise the rights as a shareholder against the defendant who is the issuing company. There is no evidence to prove that the plaintiff holds the stock certificates of this case.

Rather, according to the evidence Nos. 1-2, 2, 2, and 3 of the evidence Nos. 1-2, 3, C alleged that it concluded a sales contract with the Defendant on February 26, 2010 on the 400,000 shares of the Defendant Company. On November 19, 2012, C claimed the Defendant to change the title of the said shares; the Defendant requested the Defendant to verify the factual relations pertaining thereto; and on November 26, 2012, BM demanded that “B would not recognize the share sales contract between BM and C, and the said 40,000 shares still remain in the assets of BMH,” and BM H provided the answer to the effect that “AH would still remain in the assets of BM.”