1. The defendant confirms that the shareholder's right to the shares listed in the separate sheet exists in the plaintiff.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant is a person registered as a shareholder of 42,400 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) among the 160,000 shares issued by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) (hereinafter “instant shares”), and the Plaintiff is an employee of the instant company. The Plaintiff is a director of the instant company from the time of the incorporation of the instant company, who was employed as the representative director of the instant company on June 14, 2016.

B. Around June 14, 2001, the date of the incorporation of the instant company, the Defendant began to acquire 4,900 shares of the instant company in the name of the Defendant by receiving a request from the Plaintiff and receiving the Plaintiff’s subscription price for shares, and then acquiring 4,900 shares of the instant company under the name of the Defendant. From that time to October 1, 2008, the Defendant received shares using the Plaintiff’s subscription price for shares or the subscription price for shares issued from several times until October 1, 2008. Some shares were currently owned by transferring the shares to another person in accordance with the direction of the Plaintiff.

C. From the date of incorporation to the date of the incorporation of the instant company, the Defendant did not exercise its authority as a shareholder by attending the general meeting of shareholders of the instant company and exercising voting rights, and did not receive dividends from the instant company for holding stocks.

On April 19, 2019, a duplicate of the complaint of this case, including the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to terminate a title trust agreement with respect to the shares of this case between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, was served on the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap1 to 9 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, it is appropriate to deem the Plaintiff to have held title trust with the Defendant. Thus, the Plaintiff terminated the title trust agreement with the Defendant on the instant shares upon the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case.