1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B and C, each of 2,500 common shares of Co., Ltd. E, and Defendant D, each of 2.1 common shares of Co., Ltd.

1. The facts that the Plaintiff, while establishing a stock company around August 2007, committed each title trust with Defendant B and C with each of 2,500 common shares of Co., Ltd., and with Defendant D with each of 2,600 common shares of Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “instant shares”), do not conflict between the parties.

In addition, since the Plaintiff terminated each title trust agreement between the Defendants through the service of the duplicate of the instant complaint, the Defendants are obligated to return the instant shares to the Plaintiff.

2. The Defendants asserted as to the Defendants’ assertion. At the time of entering into a title trust agreement with respect to the Plaintiff’s shares, the Plaintiff agreed to pay KRW 4 million to Defendant B, Defendant C, and D for the use of name. The Defendants’ obligation to return shares and the Plaintiff’s obligation to pay for the use of name in concurrent performance relationship, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim against the Plaintiff in violation of this agreement is unreasonable.

In light of the above, there is no evidence to prove that at the time of concluding a title trust agreement with respect to the instant shares, the Plaintiff agreed to pay the Defendants money in return for the use of name as alleged above. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion on a different premise is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.