The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff and Defendant B’s husband and wife who are currently pending a divorce lawsuit, and the Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd”) issued 10,000 shares of KRW 5,00 at par value at the time of establishment in around 2008. Among them, 2,000 shares (20% of the shares issued) were registered in the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant shares”), and all shares, including the instant shares, in the name of the Defendant Co., Ltd. as of the time of issuance, are registered in the name of the Defendant Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant shares”). There is no dispute between the parties.

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of the incorporation of the Defendant Company’s assertion, the Plaintiff paid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff at the time of the incorporation of the Defendant Company.

However, Defendant B abused himself as the representative director of the Defendant Company, and arbitrarily changed the name on the register of shareholders of the instant shares to Defendant B.

Therefore, the instant shares against Defendant B are confirmed to be owned by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant Company seeks implementation of the transfer procedure for the said shares to the Plaintiff.

B. At the time of the establishment of the Defendant Company’s assertion by the Defendants, the instant shares in the name of the Plaintiff were held in title trust by Defendant B to avoid oligopolistic shareholders.

On March 9, 2016, Defendant B terminated the title trust and changed the shareholder name to Defendant B.

These procedures are justified by the substantial shareholder to recover the true title of shares.

3. Determination

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant submitted evidence Nos. 2 through 6 and evidence Nos. 2 through 6, by asserting that the source of KRW 10 million for each of the instant shares was derived from their own funds.

However, the Plaintiff and the Defendant appears to have moved of funds frequent between themselves as married couple, and it is difficult to find out the fundamental source of the fund as it is not a clearly large amount of the share payment.

Therefore, the plaintiff and the defendant.