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

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following changes or additional statements among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) thus, the same shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article

(Attachment) 2. 2. In the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, after being written or added, “A 21, 24 through 27, Eul 29, 30, and 31, and the testimony of K witness of the court of first instance” shall be added to “A 21, 24 through 27, B 29, 30, and 31.”

The following shall be added to the six pages 18 of the first instance judgment:

As asserted by the Plaintiff, even if there is some lack of explanation as to the process of acquiring each of the shares listed in the separate sheet by Defendant D and E, such circumstance alone does not preclude the presumption of the shareholder registry by the Plaintiff, and it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff is the actual owner of each share listed in the separate sheet.

The following shall be added to the sixth 20 pages of the first instance judgment:

The Plaintiff asserted that from the Defendant B’s account to the Plaintiff’s account, the money was transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the Plaintiff’s account, from the F’s account to the Defendant D and E’s account, and that the flow of the said money constitutes direct evidence supporting the existence of title trust. However, in light of the fact that the amount of money transferred from Defendant B’s account to the Plaintiff’s account and the amount of money transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to Defendant D and E via F’s account does not coincide with the amount of money transferred from the Plaintiff’s account to the Plaintiff’s account, it cannot be readily concluded that Defendant D and E’s share price or transfer price, and subscription price for new shares received from Defendant B’s funds.

Even if Defendant D and E received funds from Defendant D and E in the above manner and paid the price for share capital or the price for share capital increase, Defendant D and E received funds, i.e., the Plaintiff and F, in order to acquire each of the shares listed in the separate sheet in Defendant D and E’s name.