1. It is confirmed that the shareholder of the shares listed in the separate sheet is each Plaintiff.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants.

1. Basic facts

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) was established on June 10, 2002 as a company engaged in a creative business and a business of manufacturing plastic assembly products for construction. At the time of D’s establishment, the Plaintiff acquired 1,600 common shares of KRW 1,600 for D’s face value, and held a title trust with Defendant C.

B. On February 3, 2005, E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) was established on February 3, 2005 as a company engaging in a window-ho Lake and steel product construction business. The Plaintiff acquired 19,800 common shares of KRW 19,800 in E’s face value at the time of its establishment, and the Plaintiff respectively held the title trust of 2,200 shares to Defendant B, and 2,200 shares to Defendant C.

C. Meanwhile, as a result of the merger of E on July 16, 2009, as to the existing shares, Defendant B was arranged as holding 2,200 common shares of KRW 10,000 (hereinafter “instant shares”) and Defendant C’s 3,800 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”).

The Plaintiff’s instant shares and the instant shares were sent respectively to Defendant C on September 4, 2017, and Defendant B on September 5, 2017, a duplicate of the instant complaint containing the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate the title trust agreement with respect to the instant shares.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 3 and the purport of whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff, as the actual owner of the instant shares and the instant C shares, borrowed the name of the Defendants and respectively nominal trust, and terminated a title trust agreement with the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, and thus, the Plaintiff’s shareholder rights of the instant shares and the instant C shares were returned to the Plaintiff. As long as the Defendants asserted this, the Plaintiff has a benefit to seek confirmation of the Plaintiff’s shareholder rights.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is justified, and it is so decided as per Disposition.